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: were told why they should not let Einstein spend the night. (V. Dougan Depo. at 15:12-20; T. Dougan Depo. at 16:13-25.) Furthermore, despite Coviello’s -warning and Plaintiffs’ initial reluctance, they ultimately permitted Einstein to stay the night because Defendants’ urged them to do so based on their prior experiences and because Einstein had not exhibited any signs of aggression in Plaintiffs’ presence. (V. Dougan Depo. at 31:7-32:19.) Even accepting that Plaintiffs were warned by the breeder not to permit a sleep-over, they were given no reason for this, and the warning was ignored solely as a result of Defendants’ representations. At most, this could constitute simple negligence, which is not sufficient to survive summary judgment. See Pingaro, 322 N.J.Super. at 498, 731 A.2d 523 (<HOLDING>), Budai, 212 N.J.Super. at 526, 515 A.2d 822 Options: A. holding that there is no cutpa violation when the sole basis of the claim is the defendants negligence and the jury determines that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent B. holding it was error to submit a fraud claim to the jury partly because there was no principle of law establishing an obligation of disclosure C. holding that where there is no essential conflict as to the facts and the evidence the trial court was correct in refusing to submit the theory of strict liability to the jury D. holding that there is no basis in law to submit the issue of plaintiffs negligence to the jury when there was no evidence that plaintiff incited the dog or voluntarily or unreasonably exposed herself to a known risk E. holding that there was no prejudice to a plaintiff and thus no basis for sanctions when evidence believed to be lost was found and promptly turned over to the plaintiff

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that there is no basis in law to submit the issue of plaintiffs negligence to the jury when there was no evidence that plaintiff incited the dog or voluntarily or unreasonably exposed herself to a known risk
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 may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which, taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. Except for the Deed and other documents to be recorded at Closing, electronic, photocopy and facsimile copies of signatures may be used in place and stead of original signatures with the same force and effect as originals.

assistant: Counterparts
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 represents and warrants that it has all requisite power and authority to enter into and carry out the terms and provisions of this Agreement and the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement does not breach or conflict with any agreement, document or instrument to which it is a party or bound. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended except in writing signed by Wainwright and the Company. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of both Wainwright and the Company and their respective assigns, successors, and legal representatives. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of Wainwright and the Company with respect to this Offering and supersedes any prior agreements with respect to the subject matter hereof. If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid or unenforceable in any respect, such determination will not affect such provision in any other respect, and the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts (including facsimile counterparts), each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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 the vehicle owner does not admit responsibility or pay the fine). Equally important, a six-year statute of limitations governs the filing of citations for civil infractions such as parking violations. Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.741(1) (providing that a “civil infraction action” is a “civil action”); id. § 600.5813 (establishing a six-year statute of limitations for personal ac tanding created by the threatened consequences of failing to respond relates solely to the penalties for taking no action. This distinction rebuts Herrada’s effort to draw support from Social Security Act cases where statements in the agency’s denial notices raised uncertainty about the effect of failing to request a hearing to challenge the determination. See Day v. Shalala, 23 F.3d 1052, 1065-66 (6th Cir. 1994) (<HOLDING>); Gonzalez v. Sullivan, 914 F.2d 1197, 1203 Options: A. holding that the granting of an application to file an appeal out of time is considered part of the direct appeal process under oklahoma law B. holding the court lacked jurisdiction where the defendant failed to file a notice of appeal on the attorneys fee issue because a supplemental notice of appeal is required for us to have jurisdiction over an attorneys fees issue that becomes final subsequent to the initial notice of appeal C. holding that due process rights were not violated when alien claimed a lack of actual notice but his attorney received notice D. holding that a notice that misled claimants by equating a new application with an appeal of the initial determination violated due process E. recognizing that service of process irrelevant in the initial determination of diversity

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a notice that misled claimants by equating a new application with an appeal of the initial determination violated due process
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: A motion under § 2255 is not “inadequate or ineffective” simply because the petitioner cannot meet the gatekeeping requirements of § 2255. Dorsainvil, 119 F.3d at 251. However, we have held that § 2255 is “inadequate or ineffective” to test the legality of a conviction where a petitioner “is being detained for conduct that has subsequently been rendered non-criminal by an intervening Supreme Court decision,” and where the petitioner is otherwise barred from filing a second or successive § 2255 motion. Id. at 252. In such a case, a petitioner may seek habeas relief under § 2241. Id. Here, McAdory contended that in light of Bond v. United States, he can argue that the Hobbs Act violates constitutional principles of federalism. See — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 2355, 2365-66, 180 L.Ed.2d 269 (2011) (<HOLDING>). However, because neither Bond nor another Options: A. holding that the city had standing to challenge the formation of a water improvement district that might impede the citys expansion B. holding that a criminal defendant has a sixth amendment right to counsel at trial C. holding the defendant lacked standing to raise a doublejeopardy challenge to a statute authorizing additional penalties for underage driving while under the influence where there was no finding that he was punished under that statute D. holding that a litigant has standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute if the law is unconstitutional as applied to that particular litigant E. holding that a criminal defendant has standing to pursue a tenth amendment challenge to the statute under which he was charged as an unjustifiable expansion of federal law enforcement into a stateregulated domain

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a criminal defendant has standing to pursue a tenth amendment challenge to the statute under which he was charged as an unjustifiable expansion of federal law enforcement into a stateregulated domain
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: including the appointment of police chief. Id. Thus far, there has been no indication that other provisions of the charter (or any other source of law) subject the Town Manager’s personnel decisions to any type of review within the municipality. To the contrary, the record evidence discussed above indicates the autonomy the Town Manager enjoys in making these decisions. Moreover, the Town has not refuted Putnam’s claim that the Town Manager has final policymaking authority and neither party has addressed the requirements of that element. PL’s Mem. at 16-17. Accordingly, given the evidence in the record, this Court finds that the absence of final policymaking authority has not been established as matter of law. LaSota v. Town of Topsfield, 979 F.Supp. 45, 49 (D.Mass.1997) (Gertner, J.) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added). Finally, Putnam has cited Options: A. holding that the court may cut off discovery prior to a ruling on a motion for summary judgment where the record indicates that further discovery will not likely produce facts necessary to defeat the motion B. holding plaintiffs allegations defendant acted under col or of state law to violate rights secured by the fourteenth amendment are sufficient to defeat summary judgment of plaintiffs section 1983 claim C. holding that pure issue of law is preserved by motion for summary judgment and is reviewable after final judgment D. holding that where record is not fully developed evidence that officials likely had final policymaking authority under state law sufficient to defeat summary judgment E. recognizing that nonmoving party must present affirmative evidence to defeat summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that where record is not fully developed evidence that officials likely had final policymaking authority under state law sufficient to defeat summary judgment
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: 998 F.2d 1559, 1566 (10th Cir.1993). “For standing to exist, the plaintiff must ‘allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendant’s allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.’” Id. (quoting Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737, 751, 104 S.Ct. 3315, 3324, 82 L.Ed.2d 556 (1984)). The alleged injury “must be ‘distinct and palpable,’ Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 501 [95 S.Ct. 2197, 2206, 45 L.Ed.2d 343] (1975), as opposed to abstract, conjectural, or merely hypothetical.” Id. (parallel citations omitted). We conclude that Mr. Umbehr has standing. Mr. Umbehr asserts a violation of hi mination of the contract, and there is no dispute that any such injury is “ ‘fairly traceable’ ” to De L.Ed.2d 97 (1990); LaFalce v. Houston, 712 F.2d 292 (7th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1044, 104 S.Ct. 712, Options: A. holding that independent contractor claiming denial of public contract because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment B. holding that independent contractor claiming removal from city towing rotation list because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment C. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract in retaliation for petition was not protected by first amendment D. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract because of lobbying and other political activities not protected by first amendment E. holding that first amendment prohibits government officials from discharging or threatening to discharge lowerlevel public employees based on their political affiliation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that independent contractor claiming denial of public contract because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment
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 JOINDER AGREEMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS REPRESENT THE FINAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND MAY NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS, OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES. THERE ARE NO UNWRITTEN ORAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARTIES.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: crimes because he thought that he was communicating with and traveling to meet an adult who was "role-playing,” and not a minor. A material element of the crimes for which Mr. Seo was charged is that the person the defendant is communicating with or traveling to meet is "believed by the [defendant] to be a child.” § 847.0135(3)(a), (4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2011); see also Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 11.17(a), 11.17(c). Thus, contrary to the argument in the concurring in part and dissenting in part opinion, because Mr. Seo testified under oath that he did not believe that the person being portrayed by the undercover officers was actually a child, the trial court properly denied Mr. Seo’s request for a jury instruction on entrapment. See Wilson v. State, 577 So.2d 1300, 1302 (Fla.1991) (<HOLDING>). 2 . State v. Davis, 141 So.3d 1230 (Fla. 1st Options: A. holding that a request for an instruction on entrapment should be refused even if there is evidence to support the defense if the defendant has denied under oath the acts constituting the crime that is charged B. holding the defendant is entitled to an entrapment instruction when sufficient evidence exists from which a reasonable jury could find entrapment C. holding that a defendant may plead guilty even if he is unwilling or unable to admit his participation in the acts constituting the crime D. holding that when an indictment charges several acts in the conjunctive the verdict stands if the evidence is sufficient with respect to any one of the acts charged E. holding that defendant was not entitled to entrapment instruction when there was insufficient evidence to support such an instruction

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a request for an instruction on entrapment should be refused even if there is evidence to support the defense if the defendant has denied under oath the acts constituting the crime that is charged
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: ( the terms , privacy policy , and any additional terms that you agree to , as discussed in the entire agreement section , are referred to together as the `` agreements '' . )

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will not, and will not permit any of its Subsidiaries to, sell, lease or otherwise transfer any property or assets to, or purchase, lease or otherwise acquire any property or assets from, or otherwise engage in any other transactions with, any of its Affiliates, except (a) in the ordinary course of business at prices and on terms and conditions not less favorable to the Borrower or such Subsidiary than could be obtained on an arm’s-length basis from unrelated third parties, (b) transactions between or among the Borrower and any wholly-owned Subsidiaries not involving any other Affiliate, (c) any transaction permitted by Section 6.01 , 6.03 , 6.04 or 6.07 , (d) payment of customary fees and expenses to members of the board of directors of the Borrower and its Subsidiaries in the ordinary course of business; and (e) payment of employee compensation in the ordinary course of business to any Affiliate who is an individual in such Person’s capacity as an officer, employee or consultant of the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: slip op. (D.Wyo. November 25, 1992) (unpublished) (1992 WL 455432) ("affirmative defenses asserted by defendants seek a determination of rights with respect to assets of a depository institution” and therefore the court lacks jurisdiction over them). Resolution Trust Co. v. Scaletty, 810 F.Supp. 1505 (D.Kan.1992) (mitigation of damages defense stricken, following McGinnis in part); Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Milton L. Coulter Trust, No. 91-CV-1047-J, slip op. (D.Wyo. September 22, 1992) (unpublished) (1992 WL 455433) (court without subject matter jurisdiction over mitigation of damages and offset asserted by way of affirmative defenses because they "will affect the assets of the receivership”). But Cf. Resolution Trust Corp. v. Ryan, 801 F.Supp. 1545, 1555 (S.D.Miss.1992) (<HOLDING>); Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Vernon Options: A. holding alvarez and garza were not entitled to judgment as a matter of law on their affirmative defense of limitations when they did not negate the discovery rule in their summary judgment motions B. holding that one claim was not preempted because it did not allege the violation of duties created by any welfare plan but a violation of duties as a past employer C. holding that neglect was not excusable where the defendants did not do all that they were required to do after they received the summons and complaint in that they did not contact a lawyer or make any other arrangements with respect to their defense D. holding that similar doj guidelines not mandated by statute or the constitution do not confer substantive rights on any party E. holding that dismissal of counterclaims which are strictly defensive in nature and do not seek any monetary or affirmative relief of any kind is not mandated by 1821d13d but that the counterclaims were not proper declaratory judgment claims because they simply sought an adjudication that defendants did not violate their duties as bank officers and directors

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that dismissal of counterclaims which are strictly defensive in nature and do not seek any monetary or affirmative relief of any kind is not mandated by 1821d13d but that the counterclaims were not proper declaratory judgment claims because they simply sought an adjudication that defendants did not violate their duties as bank officers and directors
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All questions concerning the construction, validity, enforcement and interpretation of this Agreement shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Florida, without regard to the principles of conflicts of law thereof. Each party agrees that all legal proceedings concerning the interpretations, enforcement and defense of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and (whether brought against a party hereto or its respective affiliates, directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents) shall be commenced exclusively in the state and federal courts sitting in the Hillsborough County, Tampa, Florida.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No assignment or transfer of this Note or the Borrowers’ obligations hereunder is permitted without the prior written consent of Holder, and any purported assignment or transfer without the prior written consent of Holder shall be invalid ab initio .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: or a day before expiration of the one-year deadline. Such tardy notice is legally insufficient to bar Schwab’s collateral attack. We, therefore, hold that the trial court did not err when it deemed Schwab’s petition timely, as we may affirm a trial court ruling on any ground that the record supports. State v. Ngo Tho Huynh, 107 Wn. App. 68, 74, 26 P.3d 290 (2001). Motion To Withdraw Plea ¶11 We now address the merits of Schwab’s motion to withdraw his plea. We hold that the trial court properly dismissed Schwab’s CrR 7.8 motion. ¶12 Schwab made only one argument to support his motion to withdraw his plea: that he was not advised of the maximum term of confinement at Western State Hospital if he entered the plea agreement. See State v. Brasel, 28 Wn. App. 303, 313, 623 P.2d 696 (1981) (<HOLDING>). The record belies this claim. Schwab’s Options: A. holding that a defendant must have knowledge of the likely consequences of entering the guilty plea in order for a plea to be voluntary and knowing B. holding that defendant has the right to refuse a plea of insanity C. holding that the defendant was entitled to have his plea accepted absent a sound reason for rejecting the plea D. holding that due process requires that a defendant entering a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity understand that if the plea is accepted he could be committed to a state hospital for the criminally insane for a term up to the maximum possible penalty for the offense charged E. holding that plea of guilty or nolo contendere is not rendered involuntary because it is a product of plea bargaining an accepted plea bargain must be recorded and court may accept a bargained plea to a lesser offense reasonably related to a charged offense

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that due process requires that a defendant entering a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity understand that if the plea is accepted he could be committed to a state hospital for the criminally insane for a term up to the maximum possible penalty for the offense charged
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: record. Id. The deference under section 2254(d) of title 28 of the United States Code. See supra Part IV.B. A federal court reviewing a state court’s determination regarding ineffective assistance of counsel has been characterized as “doubly” deferential by the Supreme Court. Harrington, 562 U.S. at 105,131 S.Ct. 770. When applying section 2254(d), “the question is not whether counsel’s actions were reasonable[,]” but “whether there is any reasonable argument that counsel satisfied Strickland’s deferential standard.” Id. (emphasis added). The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has explained that. “[i]n assessing counsel’s performance ..., we must apply a heavy measure of deference to counsel’s judgments.” Greiner v. Wells, 417 F.3d 305, 323 (2d Cir.2005) (citations omitted) (<HOLDING>); see also, e.g., Lopez v. Rivera, 157 Options: A. holding that counsels decision not to call witnesses was unreasonable because counsels stated reasons for disputing the witnesses credibility were not supported by objective evidence B. recognizing that defendant must show 1 that counsels performance was deficient and 2 that counsels errors prejudiced the defense C. holding that a claim of failure to call witnesses is deficient of sic it does not show what the witnesses would have testified to and how that testimony might have chanted sic the outcome D. holding that the failure to call certain witnesses was not ineffective assistance because witnesses already presented similar evidence and counsel is not required to present cumulative evidence E. holding counsels decision not to call unfriendly witnesses to suggest that a third party had motive to kill the victim was not deficient

assistant: The best answer is E. holding counsels decision not to call unfriendly witnesses to suggest that a third party had motive to kill the victim was not deficient
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: finding that the putative class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.” Newton v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 259 F.3d 154, 182 (3d Cir.2001); Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a)(1). “No single magic number exists satisfying the numerosity requirement.” Moskowitz v. Lopp, 128 F.R.D. 624, 628 (E.D.Pa.1989). To satisfy the commonality requirement, Plaintiffs must show the existence of at least one question of law or fact common to the entire class. See In re the Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practice Litig., 148 F.3d 283, 310 (3d Cir.1998). ‘All that is required is that the litigation involve some common questions and that plaintiffs allege harm under the same legal theory.” Baby Neal, 43 F.3d at 58. See also Hassine v. Jeffes, 846 F.2d 169, 176-77 (3d Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). The typicality requirement is designed to Options: A. holding that it is not necessary that all putative class members share identical claims B. holding that under 216b pjlaintiffs need show only that their positions are similar not identical to the positions held by the putative class members C. holding that entry of settlement decree without notice to putative class members violated the due process rights of the class members D. holding that commonality is satisfied where the lawsuit challenges a systemwide practice or policy that affects all of the putative class members E. holding that putative class members are not parties to an action prior to class certification

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it is not necessary that all putative class members share identical claims
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: for the purchase price of $8 million, when it was actually being offered to Don McCulley for only $2.5 million, thereby allowing Don McCulley and the Gallery to conceal a $500,000 commission. Among the essential elements of fraud, without which there can be no recovery, is a showing of damages suffered due to the fraud. C & C Partners v. Sun Exploration & Prod. Co., 783 S.W.2d 707, 718 (Tex.App. — Dallas 1989, writ denied). Fraud must be the cause of the claimed loss which is established by “pleading and proof of a pecuniary loss suffered which is directly traceable to and which resulted from the false representation upon which the injured party relied.” Id. at 718-19; see also, Teledyne Exploration Co. v. Klotz, 694 S.W.2d 109, 111 (Tex.App. — Corpus Christi 1985, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (<HOLDING>). Under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Options: A. holding the plaintiffs action was one for wrongful death and not survival where damages listed in complaint were identical to damages listed in the wrongful death act B. holding theft act entitles defendant to recover reasonable and necessary attorneys fees in successfully defending theft act claim even if defendant does not recover any actual damages C. holding that complaining party may recover as actual damages compensation for the proximate results of the wrongful act D. holding that a plaintiff may recover damages under both the lanham act and the copyright act provided the copyright damages serve a purpose other than compensation E. holding that the right to recover a particular measure of damages in a workers compensation case is fixed as of the date of injury

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that complaining party may recover as actual damages compensation for the proximate results of the wrongful 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: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary that may be set forth in the LTIP or in any grant agreement thereunder and provided that the conditions of Sections 5(e) and 8 of this Plan have been fulfilled, in the event an Eligible Individual’s employment is terminated by death, for Disability, by the Company or one of its Affiliates without Cause or by such Eligible Individual resigning such Eligible Individual’s employment for Good Reason, immediately prior to the Date of Termination, all Emergence Grants then held by such Eligible Individual pursuant to the LTIP or otherwise will immediately vest, with payment of such Emergence Grants payable in accordance with the applicable award agreement (the “ Emergence Grant Acceleration ”).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower has disclosed to the Lenders all material agreements, instruments and corporate or other restrictions to which it or any of its Subsidiaries is subject, and all other matters known to it, that, individually or in the aggregate, could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. For the purposes of this Section 3.11 , all materials publicly filed by the Borrower with the SEC shall be deemed to be disclosed to the Lenders. Neither the Lender Presentation nor any of the other written reports, financial statements, certificates or other information furnished by or on behalf of the Borrower or any Subsidiary to the Administrative Agent or any Lender in connection with the negotiation of this Agreement or delivered hereunder (as modified or supplemented by all other information so furnished and all material publicly filed by the Borrower with the SEC) contains any material misstatement of fact or omits to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not materially misleading; provided that, with respect to forecasts or projected financial information, the Borrower represents only that such information was prepared in good faith based upon assumptions believed to be reasonable at the time (it being understood that forecasts and projections are subject to contingencies and no assurances can be given that any forecast or projection will be realized).

assistant: Disclosures
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: advice of counsel and under a mistaken belief that his prepetition expenditures were legitimate investments in his homestead, but the subsequent events, as the bankruptcy court noted, do not support that contention. First, none of the transfers were reported on his original schedules or his amended schedules, despite the fact that other prepetition transfers and payments were listed. Debtor’s assertion that he did not think he had to list them in his schedules does not excuse the omission. To the contrary, “[d]ebtors have an absolute duty to report whatever interests they hold in property, even if they believe their assets are worthless or are unavailable to the bankruptcy estate.” In re Yonikus, 974 F.2d 901, 904 (7th Cir.1992); see also Mertz v. Rott, 955 F.2d 596, 598 (8th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). At 11 U.S.C. § 522, the Bankruptcy Code Options: A. holding that the appellant waived his claim on appeal because he failed to address that claim in either his application for a coa or his brief on appeal B. holding that defendant was not resident of his mothers household even though his drivers license listed his mothers address and he received mail there because he expressed a belief that his residence was in a different location than his mothers home he rented and occupied his own residence and he testified that he was only living with his mother after expiration of his lease until he could find another place to live C. holding that where a debtor believes an asset is exemptible he cannot simply omit it from his schedule rather he must list the asset on his schedules and then claim the exemption D. holding that plaintiff could not show that he was disabled because he conceded that he could do his job despite his impairment E. holding that the district court did not err in continuing the trial without defendant when the trial had commenced in defendants presence he vigorously expressed his desire to be absent he was given ample opportunity to change his mind despite the disturbance he had created he had competent counsel and he knew of his right to be present

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where a debtor believes an asset is exemptible he cannot simply omit it from his schedule rather he must list the asset on his schedules and then claim the exemption
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of Kindred and Guarantor (collectively, the “ Kindred Companies ”) was duly organized and is validly existing as a Delaware or corporation, respectively. Kindred is in good standing in the State of and each of the Kindred Companies is qualified to do business and is in good standing in each of the states in which it owns property or does business. Kindred has full power and authority and possesses all material governmental approvals necessary to enable it to own, license, possess, lease or otherwise hold its properties and assets and to carry on the Business and to operate the Facility as presently conducted.

assistant: Organizations
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 your purchase or use of the services is subject to any type of value-added tax , duty or other governmental tax or fee ( `` taxes '' ) , then we may charge you for those taxes .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Seller will not, directly or to the knowledge of the Seller, indirectly, use any proceeds of a Purchase or Letter of Credit or lend, contribute or otherwise make available such proceeds of a Purchase or Letter of Credit to any Person, to fund any activities of or business with any Sanctioned Person or in any Sanctioned Country, or in any other manner that will result in a violation by any Person party to this Agreement (including any Person participating in the transaction, whether as Purchaser, LC Participant, LC Bank or Administrator, or otherwise) of Sanctions.

assistant: Sanctions
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 this case shares many similarities with the motion filed by the defendant in Antoine. Notably, defendant did not cite section 114 — 5(d) in his motion, he failed to meet the statute’s affidavit requirement, and he never asked the trial court to transfer the motion to another judge for ruling. Thus, we conclude that defendant’s “Motion of Recusal” did not trigger a duty requiring the trial court to transfer the cause to a different judge for ruling. Defendant urges us to liberally construe section 114 — 5(d) and ignore the affidavit requirement. While we agree the statute is to be liberally construed, it should not be interpreted so as to contravene its express provisions. People v. Van Pelt, 18 Ill. App. 3d 1087, 1089 (1974); see also People v. Clay, 124 Ill. App. 3d 140, 147 (1984) (<HOLDING>). Even in the absence of an affidavit, a Options: A. holding that trial judge did not err in refusing to transfer to another judge defendants motion for substitution of judge for cause where defendants motion was not made in good faith B. holding that trial judge did not err in refusing to transfer to another judge defendants motion for substitution of judge for cause where defendant failed to establish even a threshold basis for his substitution motion C. holding that burden is on trial court denying a facially sufficient rule 3800a motion to attach record establishing movant is not entitled to relief D. holding motion for substitution of judge properly denied where movant failed to attach affidavit E. holding that trial judge did not err in refusing to transfer to another judge defendants motion for substitution of judge for cause where defendants motion lacked specificity

assistant: The best answer is D. holding motion for substitution of judge properly denied where movant failed to attach affidavit
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: (“Plaintiffs ask that the Court “dismiss this action without prejudice and with leave to amend so that Plaintiffs can attempt to cure any perceived pleading deficiencies” in the event the Court finds that plaintiffs have not sufficiently demonstrated demand futility.”). 60 . Kenney, 426 F.Supp.2d at 1188 ("The Court finds no basis for allowing plaintiffs to amend their complaint.”). 61 . West Coast, 914 A.2d at 645-46. 62 . Id. at 643-44; see also id. at 646 ("Thus, the language of the [Colorado plenary court’s] opinion and the decision to deny leave to replead support the conclusion that the without prejudice order was not intended to permit West Coast to relitigate its claim.”). 63 . Id. at 638, 645-46. 64 . See Melzer v. CNET Networks, Inc., 934 A.2d 912, 917-19 (Del.Ch.2007) (<HOLDING>); see also Brehm v. Eisner, 746 A.2d 244, Options: A. holding that while the excerpt from the original complaint was competent as evidence as a pleading it was superseded by the amended complaint B. holding that plaintiff lacked a proper purpose for bringing a section 220 action because the federal judge in kenney had denied plaintiffs request to replead demand futility in an amended complaint C. holding that plaintiffs wishing to inspect books and records for purposes of pleading demand futility in an amended derivative complaint had a proper purpose D. holding that a demand for jury trial should be denied if the issues in the original complaint and the amended complaint turn on the same matrix of facts E. holding that amended pleading did not commence a new action for the purposes of cafa because the claims were exactly the same in both pleadings and the replacement representative was a member of the putative class in the original pleading

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that plaintiffs wishing to inspect books and records for purposes of pleading demand futility in an amended derivative complaint had a proper purpose
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: For all matters arising directly or indirectly from this Agreement or the Plan, the Company and the Grantee each (i) irrevocably consent and submit to the sole exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in New York City, New York, and the Company and the Grantee hereto hereby irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of any such courts in connection with any legal action, lawsuit, arbitration, mediation, or other legal or quasi legal proceeding (“ Proceeding ”) directly or indirectly arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the Plan; provided that a party to this agreement shall be entitled to enforce an order or judgment of any such court in any United States or foreign court having jurisdiction over the other party, (ii) irrevocably waive, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any objection that either party may now or later have to the laying of the venue of any such Proceeding in any such court or that any such Proceeding which is brought in any such court has been brought in an inconvenient forum, (iii) irrevocably waive, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any immunity from jurisdiction of any such court or from any legal process therein, (iv) covenants that they will not, directly or indirectly, commence any Proceeding other than in such courts, and (v) agree that service of any summons, complaint, notice or other process relating to such Proceeding may be effected in the manner provided for the giving of notice as set forth in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: to make these pokémon go terms of service ( the `` terms '' ) easier to read , our video game services , the app , and our websites located at http://pokemongo.nianticlabs.com and http://www.pokemongolive.com ( the `` site '' ) are collectively called the `` services . ''

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: immunity against Gay’s claims under the Tort Claims Act. To make this determination in this case, we must decide whether the complained of actions are governmental or proprietary, whether the‘actions were discretionary, and whether Gay’s claims are of the type that subject the City to liability. See McKinney v. City of Gainesville, 814 S.W.2d 862, 865-66 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1991, no writ). The functions Gay complains the City negligently performed, street maintenance and storm sewers, are classified as governmental and subject the City to liability. But this alone does not waive the City’s immunity: the City is also immune from liability under the Act for the exercise of discretionary powers. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 101.056 (Vernon 1997); McKinney, 814 S.W.2d at 865 (<HOLDING>). There is no hard-and-fast rule for Options: A. recognizing governmental interest in rehabilitation B. holding governmental immunity is no defense to contractual liability C. holding section 1010215 does not waive governmental immunity merely because a governmental action falls within the listed governmental functions thus further inquiry under the act is necessary D. holding that if a contract surrenders or contracts away governmental functions then it exceeds the scope of a governmental entitys powers and is void E. holding that the federal government does not waive its immunity where there is no private counterpart even when uniquely governmental functions are involved

assistant: The best answer is C. holding section 1010215 does not waive governmental immunity merely because a governmental action falls within the listed governmental functions thus further inquiry under the act is necessary
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 New York, No. 08 Civ. 1034, 959 F.Supp.2d 540, 2013 WL 4046209 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 12, 2013), which also dealt with allegations of discrimination by the NYPD. In particular, Pinter does not allege that the NYPD responded to evidence of gay prostitution at video stores by directing its officers to target gay men near video stores for enforcement activity in general — stopping them while not stopping equally suspicious straight men, arresting them while not arresting straight men displaying identical behavior, and doing so regardless of whether the stop or arrest had anything to do with prostitution. If there had been evidence of this kind of selective enforcement, Pinter would have had a much stronger claim for intentional discrimination based on sexual orientation. Cf. id. at *7, *72-74 (<HOLDING>). There are any number of scenarios in which Options: A. holding that complaint failed to state an equal protection claim even without the additional hurdle of the heightened pleading standard the words equal protection do not appear anywhere in the complaint B. holding that in light of engquist the equal protection clause does not apply to a public employee asserting a violation of the clause based on a class of one theory of liability C. holding that the equal protection clause prevents the police from targeting a protected group for heightened levels of general enforcement activity based on the disproportionate representation of that group in local crime complaints D. holding that moral disapproval of homosexuals like a bare desire to harm the group is an interest that is insufficient to satisfy rational basis review under the equal protection clause E. holding that lprs are entitled to the protection of the equal protection clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the equal protection clause prevents the police from targeting a protected group for heightened levels of general enforcement activity based on the disproportionate representation of that group in local crime complaints