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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Manager will invoice Partnership from time to time, as determined by Manager in its sole discretion, including, without limitation, advance requests for the current month’s estimated costs, fees, and expenses, as determined by Manager in its sole discretion. Any over or under payments will be reconciled in subsequent invoices with appropriate credits or deductions, as applicable. Partnership shall pay invoiced amounts promptly, and in any event within 30 days, after the receipt of each such invoice. Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything else in this Agreement to the contrary, Manager may elect to retain proceeds that it receives on behalf of Partnership to the extent it would otherwise invoice Partnership for such amounts and in such event it shall show any such retained amounts as a credit on such invoice. Failure by Manager to submit an invoice for any amounts due hereunder shall not relieve Partnership of its payment obligations under this Agreement when due hereunder.

assistant: Payments
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 execution, delivery and performance by the Company of this Agreement and the other Transaction Documents to which it is a party, the issuance and sale of the Shares and the consummation by it of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby do not and will not: (i) conflict with or violate any provision of the Company’s or any Subsidiary’s certificate or articles of incorporation, bylaws or other organizational or charter documents, (ii) conflict with, or constitute a default (or an event that with notice or lapse of time or both would become a default) under, result in the creation of any Lien upon any of the properties or assets of the Company or any Subsidiary, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, anti-dilution or similar adjustments, acceleration or cancellation (with or without notice, lapse of time or both) of, any agreement, credit facility, debt or other instrument (evidencing a Company or Subsidiary debt or otherwise) or other understanding to which the Company or any Subsidiary is a party or by which any property or asset of the Company or any Subsidiary is bound or affected, or (iii) subject to the Required Approvals, conflict with or result in a violation of any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment, injunction, decree or other restriction of any court or governmental authority to which the Company or a Subsidiary is subject (including federal and state securities laws and regulations), or by which any property or asset of the Company or a Subsidiary is bound or affected; except in the case of each of clauses (ii) and (iii), such as could not have or reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Once a Loss is agreed to by the Company or finally adjudicated to be payable pursuant to this Article VI , the Company shall satisfy its obligations within 15 days of such final, non-appealable adjudication by wire transfer of immediately available funds. The parties hereto agree that should the Company not make full payment of any such obligations within such 15-day period, any amount payable shall accrue interest from and including the date of agreement of the Company or final, non-appealable adjudication to the date such payment has been made at a rate per annum equal to 12%.

assistant: Payments
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 proposed Final Judgment should be revised to accurately reflect the jury’s exemplary damages award as to each individual Defendant rather than joint and several liability among all Defendants.” Further, the individual defendants argued in response to Horizon’s amended motion for entry of judgment that “[t]he jury was not asked to assess exemplary damages against Acadia or PRP..,. Acadia and PRP cannot be jointly and severally liable for the exemplary damages assessed against Saul, Palus, Ula-sewicz, Bayma, and Piechocki,” Acadia and PRP adopted the individual defendants’ arguments raised in their response to Horizon’s amended motion for entry of judgment. Thus, Acadia and PRP preserved error in the trial court. Cf. In re B.L.D., 113 S.W.3d 340, 353 (Tex. 2003) (orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>); Pirtle v. Gregory, 629 S.W.2d 919, 920 (Tex. Options: A. holding in summary judgment context that appellate court may consider other grounds that the movant preserved for review and trial court did not rule on in the interest of judicial economy B. recognizing that preservationoferror rules support the strong interest in ensuring that our trial courts have an opportunity to correct errors as a matter of judicial economy C. holding that federal habeas relief is not available to correct errors of state law D. holding that because the contract dispute between the parties in this case constitutes a justiciable matter that is cognizable in our trial courts our courts had subject matter jurisdiction E. holding that in the interest of judicial economy we exercise our discretionary power to suspend the rules pertaining to interlocutory appeals and address the remainder of the defendants appeal

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that preservationoferror rules support the strong interest in ensuring that our trial courts have an opportunity to correct errors as a matter of judicial economy
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: Payment of the Award is subject to the Participant satisfying all applicable federal, state, local and other tax that the Company is required to withhold with respect to the Award on a Payment Date (including the Participant’s FICA obligation). The Company shall have the power and the right to (i) deduct or withhold from all amounts payable to the Participant pursuant to the Award or otherwise or (ii) require the Participant to remit to the Company an amount sufficient to satisfy any applicable taxes required by law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: on a special project or not, determination of which facts are necessary prerequisites to deciding whether Mr. Hart was a “leased worker” at the time of his accident. Accordingly, summary judgment cannot be granted on this issue. In summary, while Plaintiffs present compelling evidence that Mr. Hart was a “temporary” worker, Defendants present equally compelling evidence that Mr. Hart was a “leased” worker. In order to make a final determination about whether Mr. Hart was a temporary or a leased worker at the time of his accident, the Court will to have to “adjudge the credibility of the witnesses and weigh the evidence” presented, which it is not permitted to do on a motion for summary judgment. See Pita v. State Street Bank and Trust Co., 666 So.2d 268, 268 (Fla.3d Dist.Ct.App.1996) (<HOLDING>). Thus, having viewed the evidence in the light Options: A. holding that it is trial courts function to evaluate witness credibility and weigh conflicting evidence B. holding that on a motion for summary judgment it is settled that a trial court is not permitted to weigh material conflicting evidence or pass upon the credibility of the witnesses C. holding that in resolving sufficiency of evidence appeals court does not weigh evidence or review credibility of witnesses D. holding that a successor judge may consider a motion for new trial in a case tried to the court where she is not required to weigh conflicting evidence or pass upon the credibility of witnesses but can resolve such issues upon evidence which is not materially in conflict E. holding that it is function of trial court to judge witnesses credibility and to weigh conflicting evidence

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that on a motion for summary judgment it is settled that a trial court is not permitted to weigh material conflicting evidence or pass upon the credibility of the witnesses
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: Use of the masculine pronoun shall be deemed to include usage of the feminine or neuter pronoun where appropriate. Whenever the words “include,” “includes” or “including” are used in this Agreement, they shall be deemed to be followed by the words “without limitation.” Unless otherwise indicated, references in this Agreement to any “Section” shall be deemed to refer to the indicated Section of this Agreement. The headings set forth in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not be deemed to constitute part of this Agreement or to affect the construction thereof.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party agrees that irreparable harm, for which there may be no adequate remedy at law and for which the ascertainment of damages would be difficult, would occur in the event any of the provisions of this Escrow Agreement were not performed in accordance with its specific terms or were otherwise breached. Each party accordingly agrees that the other parties shall be entitled specifically to enforce this Escrow Agreement and to obtain an injunction or injunctions to prevent breaches of the provisions of this Escrow Agreement and to enforce specifically the terms and provisions hereof or thereof, in each instance without being required to post bond or other security and in addition to, and without having to prove the adequacy of, other remedies at law.

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: From time to time, at the request of QLT and without additional consideration, the Stockholder shall use commercially reasonable efforts to execute and deliver, or cause to be executed and delivered, such additional transfers, assignments, endorsements, proxies, consents and other instruments, and shall take such further actions, as QLT may reasonably request for the purpose of carrying out and furthering the intent of this Voting Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Seller and the Purchaser shall bear their own fees and expenses incurred in connection with the negotiation and execution of this Agreement and each other agreement, document and instrument contemplated by this Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notices required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be delivered (a) in person, (b) by a commercial overnight courier that guarantees next day delivery and provides a receipt, (c) by legible facsimile (followed by hard copy delivered in accordance with preceding subsections (a)-(b)) or (d) by electronic mail transmission, and shall be served on the parties at the addresses set forth in Section B . Any of the Parties may change its address for the receipt of notices, demands, consents, requests and other communications by giving written notice to the other Party in the manner provided for above. Any notice shall be effective only upon receipt (or refusal by the intended recipient to accept delivery).

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: All payments required to be made by the Company hereunder to Executive or his dependents, beneficiaries or estate will be subject to the withholding of such amounts relating to tax and/or other payroll deductions as may be required by law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All payments with respect to this Note shall be made in lawful money of the United States of America, at the address of the Holder as of the date hereof or as designated in writing by the Holder from time to time. The receipt by the Holder of immediately available funds shall constitute a payment of principal and interest hereunder and shall satisfy and discharge the liability for principal and interest on this Note to the extent of the sum represented by such payment. Payment shall be credited first to the accrued interest then due and payable and the remainder applied to principal.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the hearsay exceptions covered statements that by their nature were not testimonial — for example, business records or statements in furtherance of a conspiracy.” Id. at 56, 124 S.Ct. 1354; see also id. at 76, 124 S.Ct. 1354 (Rehnquist, C.J., concurring in the judgment) (“[T]he Court’s analysis of ‘testimony’ excludes at least some hearsay exceptions, such as business records and official records.”). Garth stipulated at trial that the tax returns were business records to avoid the “need to bring in a business records witness[ ].” She makes no attempt, in her brief, to argue that the tax returns were testimonial. And, in fact, the returns were not prepared for litigation, as is expected of testimonial evidence. See United States v. Torres-Villalobos, 487 F.3d 607, 613 (8th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>) Consequently, the admission of tax returns did Options: A. holding that certified records of maintenance are nontestimonial and are not prepared for any particular defendant B. holding that not all of claims file was prepared in anticipation of litigation and noting that the majority of cases that have dealt with the issue of whether investigative materials prepared by insurance claims adjusters is workproduct prepared in anticipation of litigation have held that since insurance companies have a routine duty to investigate accidents such materials are not prepared in anticipation of litigation C. holding that gradecrossing accident reports prepared by a railroad were not business records because they were not prepared for the systematic conduct of the enterprise as a railroad business rather the reports are calculated for use essentially in the court not in the business their primary utility is in litigating not in railroading D. holding that warrants of deportation were properly characterized as nontestimonial official records that were prepared independent of this litigation and were not prepared to prove facts for use in future criminal prosecutions E. holding that driving records were nontestimonial

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that warrants of deportation were properly characterized as nontestimonial official records that were prepared independent of this litigation and were not prepared to prove facts for use in future criminal prosecutions
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: also Bahrle v. Exxon Corp., 145 N.J. 144, 156-57, 678 A.2d 225 (1996) (reaffirming the Court’s holding in Ventron, supra); Restatement (Second) of the Law of Torts §§ 519, 520 (1969) (setting out strict liability rule and test for abnormally dangerous activity on land). The same rationale applies to pollution that is released into the air from chemicals stored at a chemical facility. An actor who chooses to store dangerous chemicals should be responsible for the release of those chemicals into the air. That Alden Leeds lawfully and properly stored chemicals does not alter that conclusion. See DeEugenio & Sons v. Division of Envtl. Quality, 92 N.J.A.R.2d (Vol.5) (EPE) 47, 1992 WL 257715, aff'd, No. A-4055-91T2, (App. Div. April 2,1993), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 480, 634 A.2d 527 (1993) (<HOLDING>). The risks attendant to the storage of Options: A. holding bza estopped from denying a variance where inter alia injury to the public would be minimal but not reaching the question of the effect of the estoppel on a claim made by a neighboring landowner B. holding it is a question of fact C. recognizing the open question D. holding that despite lawfulness of open burning in question consequent deposit of smoke particulate on neighboring property violated njac 72752a E. holding that generally the question of waiver and estoppel is a question of fact

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that despite lawfulness of open burning in question consequent deposit of smoke particulate on neighboring property violated njac 72752a
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: Greenleaf, The Law of Evidence, section 432, at 551 n. 1 (6th ed. 1852) (finding a motion to exclude witnesses to be grantable of favor only and at the discretion of the trial court). As part of the common law of England, “the rule” was formally received into the law of the Territory of Missouri in 1816. When Missouri achieved statehood in 1821, the English common law was similarly integrated into the laws of the state. Section 1.010 RSMo 2000. Application of “the rule” began appearing in Missouri case law by the early 19th century. See State v. Hughes, 71 Mo. 633, 636 (Mo.1880) (finding that court may, in its discretion, exclude witness from courtroom as it sees fit in order to meet the requirements of justice in each particular case); Keith v. Wilson, 6 Mo. 435, 441-42 (Mo.1840) (<HOLDING>); King v. State, 1 Mo. 717, 718 (Mo.1827) Options: A. holding that it is improper to ask a witness to comment on the credibility of another witness B. holding rule applicable to witness C. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendant an opportunity to recall a witness who had already testified and been subject to crossexamination D. holding prior testimony was admissible where the witness who first testified during a suppression hearing was murdered after he testified where the defendant was represented by counsel who had extensively crossexamined the witness E. holding that court did not err in failing to exclude witness who had remained in courtroom while another witness testified despite having been put under the rule

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that court did not err in failing to exclude witness who had remained in courtroom while another witness testified despite having been put under the rule
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: 717 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Oct. 30, 2008). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case. Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed both the IJ’s and the BIA’s opinions “for the sake of completeness.” Zaman v. Mukasey, 514 F.3d 233, 237 (2d Cir.2008). The applicable standards of review are well-established. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B); Yanqin Weng v. Holder, 562 F.3d 510, 513 (2d Cir.2009). As an initial matter, we lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s preter-mission of Jin’s asylum application as untimely because Jin challenges only the IJ’s factual findings regarding when he arrived in the United States. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a)(3), 1252(a)(2)(D); Xiao Ji Chen v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 471 F.3d 315, 326-29 (2d Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Thus, we dismiss Jin’s petition for review Options: A. holding that an appeal denying a petition for what was essentially a petition for a new trial to reopen the criminal process was not separately appealable B. holding that appellate review of hearsay issues is de novo with no presumption of correctness C. holding that a petition raises a question of law when it alleges a factfinding which is flawed by an error of law or an abuse of discretion that is based on a legally erroneous standard D. holding that the question of substantial noncompliance with the requirements of a permanency plan was a question of law reviewed de novo with no presumption of correctness E. holding that a question of law is not implicated when the petition for review essentially disputes the correctness of the ijs factfinding

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a question of law is not implicated when the petition for review essentially disputes the correctness of the ijs factfinding
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: (a) Any and all payments by or on account of any obligation of any Loan Party under any Loan Document shall be made free and clear of and without deduction for Taxes except as required by applicable law. If any applicable law (as determined in the good faith discretion of an applicable Withholding Agent) requires the deduction or withholding of any Tax from any such payment by a Withholding Agent, then the applicable Withholding Agent shall be entitled to make such deduction or withholding and shall timely pay the full amount deducted or withheld to the relevant Governmental Authority in accordance with applicable law and, if such Tax is an Indemnified Tax, then the sum payable by the applicable Loan Party shall be increased as necessary so that after such deduction or withholding has been made (including such deductions and withholdings applicable to additional sums payable under this Section) the applicable Recipient receives an amount equal to the sum it would have received had no such deduction or withholding been made.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: not possibly have been injured by the transfer and therefore cannot seek to set aside or disregard the conveyance. The New York courts, like courts in other jurisdictions, have seldom used the explicit “proof of injury” language in cases under the UFCA. Perhaps, as Kreditt-Finans has pointed out, this is because creditors ordinarily do not seek to invalidate transactions that cause them no injury and accordingly the question arises only infrequently. However, at least one New York appellate court has held that under the UFCA “creditors have causes of action only to the extent to which they have been damaged.” Buckley Petroleum Products, Inc. v. Goldman, 28 A.D.2d 640, 641, 280 N.Y.S.2d 876, 878 (1967). See Suffolk & Nassau Amusement Co. v. Ambrose, 145 N.Y.S.2d 424 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.1955) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, numerous courts in other Options: A. holding that a plaintiff who has not sustained any damage as the result of a transfer of property cannot seek to set that transfer aside as fraudulent B. holding that even though a transfer of property eg money incidentally benefits another it cannot be said as a matter of law or logic that the transaction was a fraudulent transfer as to the party benefited C. holding that debtors cannot claim an exemption in a homestead after trustee avoided the transfer of the property as a fraudulent conveyance because the transfer by the debtors was voluntary D. recognizing potential for fraudulent transfer in foreclosure context if debtor enjoyed significant equity in property but received little or no value from the transfer E. holding bankruptcy courts cannot enter final judgment on fraudulent transfer claims

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a plaintiff who has not sustained any damage as the result of a transfer of property cannot seek to set that transfer aside as fraudulent
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: Buyer and its representatives shall hold in strictest confidence all data and information obtained with respect to Seller or the Property, including, without limitation, the Property Information, whether obtained before or after the execution and delivery of this Agreement, and shall not disclose the same to others; provided, however, that it is understood and agreed that Buyer may disclose such data and information to the directors, investors, direct or indirect owners, employees, lenders, consultants, accountants, advisors and attorneys of Buyer provided that such persons are told of the confidential nature of such materials and that Buyer shall be liable for any breach by them of this Section 9.23 ; provided, further, however, that Buyer may disclose such data and information (a) to comply with law, regulation or judicial order (upon advice of counsel), or (b) to enforce the terms of this Agreement. In the event this Agreement is terminated or Buyer fails to perform hereunder, Buyer shall promptly destroy any statements, documents, schedules, exhibits or other written information obtained from Seller in connection with this Agreement or the transaction contemplated herein. In the event of a breach or threatened breach by Buyer or its agents or representatives of this Section 9.23 , Seller shall be entitled to an injunction restraining Buyer or its agents or representatives from disclosing, in whole or in part, such confidential information. Nothing herein shall be construed as prohibiting Seller from pursuing any other available remedy at law or in equity for such breach or threatened breach. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, Buyer may issue a press release prior to Closing which includes basic information about the square feet of the buildings, the general construction of the buildings, the location of the Property, and the names of the Tenants and their affiliates; provided that no such press release shall disclose the Purchase Price, the name of Seller, or the name of Seller’s property manager. The provisions of this Section 9.23 shall terminate at Closing but shall survive any earlier termination of this Agreement.

assistant: Confidentiality
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: Nothing in this ARTICLE X or elsewhere in this Agreement shall prohibit either Party from seeking and obtaining immediate injunctive or other equitable relief if such Party reasonably believes that it will suffer irreparable harm from the actions or inaction of the other.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Purchaser may not assign its interest under this Agreement to any person or entity without the prior written consent of Seller, except that Purchaser shall have the right to assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement to a corporation, limited liability company, general partnership, limited partnership, or any similar entity if the legal and beneficial interest in such entity is wholly owned by the Purchaser or the current owners of Purchaser or controlled by principals of Purchaser. In the event of any permitted assignment, the assignee shall assume all obligations of Purchaser hereunder and Purchaser shall remain liable as a principal and not as a surety.

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: some two and a half years later, no violent acts had occurred on her property or in the general vicinity of her property. The record also shows that the police had no knowledge of any threats being made against the employees of the massage parlor, nor did the victim’s own husband. In addition, the victim never expressed any concern over her safety or security at the massage parlor. Since there is no evidence in the record of any previous incidents of violence or threats against the victim which would have placed the Defendant on notice of the likelihood of the victim’s murder, Plaintiffs have failed to establish the victim’s murder was foreseeable. See Napper v. Kenwood Drive-In Theatre, 310 S.W.2d 270, 272 (1958) and Grisham v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 929 F.Supp. 1054 (E.D.Ky.1995) (<HOLDING>). As such, Defendant Seawright is entitled to Options: A. holding that duty to protect from criminal acts does not arise in the absence of a foreseeable risk of harm B. holding that 8 incidents of assault theft robbery or burglary on the premises and 80 similar incidents within a 2bloek area within the prior 3 years did not constitute special circumstances giving rise to a duty to protect C. holding that walmart was not under a duty to protect a patron from a criminal assault absent prior similar incidents at their facility or in the general area D. holding that jury could conclude from prior incidents involving breaches of the peace that the assault in the parking lot was a significant foreseeable possibility which defendant had a duty to guard against E. recognizing drug traffickers will commonly possess firearms to protect their product to protect their drugs to protect their cash to protect their life and even to protect their turf alteration in original internal quotation marks omit ted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that walmart was not under a duty to protect a patron from a criminal assault absent prior similar incidents at their facility or in the general area
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AMENDMENT IS A LOAN DOCUMENT. THE LIMITED WAIVER AND SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO CREDIT AGREEMENT AND THE CREDIT AGREEMENT, EACH AS AMENDED BY THIS AMENDMENT, AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS, AS AMENDED BY THIS AMENDMENT, REPRESENT THE FINAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND MAY NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS, OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Seller has, or will have on the Closing Date, good title to the Personal Property, which shall be subject only to the Permitted Exceptions (and no other liens and encumbrances) on the Closing Date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to an exception of its own for “real property ... used or expected to be used as the principal dwelling of the consumer____” 12 C.F.R. § 226.3(b)(l)(i)(A). The exemption is therefore quite narrow. Furthermore, Core-Logic’s databases also tracks the “land use” for any particular mortgage transaction, which should allow the parties to filter out those loans made for business-related purposes. (Gordon Decl. Ex. 4, at 59-61.) Indeed, Defendants’ own review of 296 Tower City closing files revealed only twenty-six loans “that could have been used for a business purpose.” (Duvall Decl. ¶¶ 18, 22.) It therefore does not appear to the Court that determining the purpose of the class members’ loans would be “unmanageable.” See Robinson v. Fountainhead Title Grp., 252 F.R.D. 275, 294 (D.Md.2008) (<HOLDING>). If necessary, the purpose of class members’ Options: A. holding that determining whether a loan was federally related under respa did not preclude class certification B. holding that putative class members are not parties to an action prior to class certification C. holding that tolling applies to a subsequent class action when class certification was granted in a prior case D. holding that where named plaintiff was employee of class counsel district court did not abuse its discretion by denying class certification E. holding affirmative defense of mitigation did not preclude class certification

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that determining whether a loan was federally related under respa did not preclude class certification
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: Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206, 216-17, 103 S.Ct. 2961, 77 L.Ed.2d 580 (1983); Loveladies Harbor, Inc. v. United States, 27 F.3d 1545, 1554 (Fed.Cir.1994) (en banc); United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 885 (Fed.Cir.1983) (en banc). We think that the Court of Federal Claims misconstrued the scope of its jurisdiction. The Presentment Clause of the Constitution states that before becoming law, a legislative act must be approved by both houses of Congress and must be presented to the President of the United States for approval. See U.S. Const, art. I, § 7, cl. 2. We agree that this constitutional provision neither explicitly nor implicitly obligates the federal Government to pay damages, and accordingly is not by itself actionable in the Court of Federal Claims. Cf. Connolly, 716 F.2d at 887 (<HOLDING>); Carruth v. United States, 224 Ct.Cl. 422, 627 Options: A. holding that arrest made with probable cause and without excessive force does not give rise to iied claim B. holding that failure to record an assignment does not give rise to a cause of action C. holding that a dispute regarding payment of a restaurant bill does not give rise to probable cause to arrest D. holding that the first amendment does not by itself give rise to a cause of action for damages E. holding that possessing property of another for the purpose of security on a debt does not give rise to probable cause to arrest

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the first amendment does not by itself give rise to a cause of action for damages
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: from “unintended clashes between our laws and those of other nations.” Kiobel, 133 S.Ct. at 1664 (citation omitted). In the present case, however, the plaintiffs seek to enforce the customary law of nations through a jurisdictional vehicle provided under United States law, the ATS, rather than a federal statute that itself details conduct to be regulated or enforced. Thus, any substantive norm enforced through an ATS claim necessarily is recognized by other nations as being actionable. Moreover, this case does not present any potential problems associated with bringing foreign nationals into United States courts to answer for conduct committed abroad, given that the defendants are United States citizens. Cf. Sexual Minorities Uganda v. Lively, 960 F.Supp.2d 304, 322-24 (D.Mass.2013) (<HOLDING>). We likewise note that further litigation of Options: A. holding that certain claims could not be a class issue in part because the complaint did not mention the claims B. holding state buy american statute unconstitutional because it interfered with federal foreign affairs power emphasizing its effect on foreign commerce C. holding nlra applied to state bank of indias activities in the united states because most employees are american citizens or american residents and the labor dispute centers on the wages to be paid american residents foreign or natural D. holding that coverage arguably existed under an insurance policy for claims against an employer and employees for an alleged assault and battery of bar patrons and that the insurer had a duty to defend E. holding that kiobel did not bar ats claims against an american citizen in part because this is not a case where a foreign national is being hailed into an unfamiliar court to defend himself

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that kiobel did not bar ats claims against an american citizen in part because this is not a case where a foreign national is being hailed into an unfamiliar court to defend himself
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: From time to time, at the request of Parent and without further consideration, the Shareholder shall promptly execute and deliver such additional documents and take all such further action as may be necessary to consummate and make effective the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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: incarceration in the Collier County Jail to be followed by a two-year term of probation. The trial court rejected the State’s recommendation. The trial court stated, “You still don’t have any remorse for what you did. When I asked you if you had anything to say, you didn’t say I am sorry. You didn’t say anything about the offense. I asked you twice. ... You still don’t show any remorse.” (Emphasis added.) After careful review of the court’s comments prior to imposing Mr. Pehlke’s sentence, we conclude that the trial court committed fundamental error by considering Mr. Pehlke’s failure to show remorse for his actions. See Smith v. State, 62 So.3d 698, 699 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011); Brown v. State, 27 So.3d 181, 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Bracero v. State, 10 So.3d 664, 665-66 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (<HOLDING>). The State concedes that it was fundamental Options: A. holding that because restitution hearings are a part of sentencing and have nothing to do with a defendants guilt or innocence the rules of evidence do not apply B. holding the error harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt C. holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt D. holding that even the admission of a coerced confession may be harmless error and noting that the central purpose of a criminal trial is to decide the factual question of the defendants guilt or innocence E. holding that it was fundamental error for a sentencing court to consider a criminal defendants protestations of innocence because due process guarantees an individual the right to maintain innocence even when faced with evidence of overwhelming guilt

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that it was fundamental error for a sentencing court to consider a criminal defendants protestations of innocence because due process guarantees an individual the right to maintain innocence even when faced with evidence of overwhelming guilt
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: 430, 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978). Thus, unless the appellant can demonstrate a reasonable expectation of privacy in the place searched, his mere possessory interest in the searched government quarters will not establish a Fourth Amendment violation. See United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. at 91-92, 100 S.Ct. at 2552-2553; United States v. Quinn, — U.S.-, 106 S.Ct. 1623, 89 L.Ed.2d 803 (1986) (per curiam decision dismissing writ of certiorari as improvidently granted); Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98, 105-106, 100 S.Ct. 2556, 2561-2562, 65 L.Ed.2d 633 (1980); United States v. Miller, 13 M.J. 75, 77 (C.M.A.1982) (person seeking to suppress search evidence bears burden of proving he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in area being searched); cf. United States v. Harris, 5 M.J. at 46-47 (<HOLDING>). The test for determining whether appellant Options: A. holding that society recognizes a reasonable expectation of privacy B. holding defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in blood sample drawn by hospital C. recognizing that actual standing by virtue of a reasonable expectation of privacy may be established in certain circumstances by a proprietory interest in premises seized D. holding that passengers lacked any reasonable expectation of privacy and therefore had no standing to challenge the search of the vehicle E. recognizing that in certain circumstances inquiry notice may be determined as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that actual standing by virtue of a reasonable expectation of privacy may be established in certain circumstances by a proprietory interest in premises seized
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice, request, consent or approval required or permitted to be given under this Agreement or pursuant to law shall be sufficient if in writing, and if and when sent by certified or registered mail, with postage prepaid, to Executive’s residence (as noted in the Company’s records), or to the Company’s principal office, as the case may be.

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: (1987) (and its progeny), which holds that the very nature of prescription drugs themselves precludes the imposition of a warrant of fitness for “ordinary purposes,” as each individual for whom they are prescribed is a unique organism who must be examined by a physician who is aware of the nature of the patient’s condition as well as the medical history of the patient. The reasoning in Makripodis, which involved a claim against a pharmacist, has subsequently been applied to bar breach of implied warranty claims against pharmaceutical manufacturers and makers of medical devices. See Luke v. Am. Home Prods. Corp., 1998 WL 1781624 at *6 (Pa.Com.Pl.1998); Murray v. Synthes (U.S.A.), Inc., 1999 WL 672937 at *9 (E.D.Pa.1999). See also Hahn v. Richter, 543 Pa. 558, 673 A.2d 888, 891 (1996) (<HOLDING>) It is uncontested that New Jersey law Options: A. holding manufacture had no duty to warn of the dangers of smoking because the dangers of cigarette smoking have long been known to the community B. recognizing under illinois law that pharmaceutical manufacturer has duty to warn of any dangers associated with offlabel use of product if such dangers were reasonably known C. holding a manufacturer had no postsale duty to warn of dangers associated with an auger because numerous hodder factors were not present D. holding that where the adequacy of warnings associated with prescription drugs is at issue the failure of the manufacturer to exercise reasonable care to warn of dangers ie the manufacturers negligence is the only recognized basis of liability E. recognizing under alabama law that drugs manufacturer owed duty to warn about potential dangers of using prescription drug for an offlabel to patients prescribing physician by drugs manufacturer

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that where the adequacy of warnings associated with prescription drugs is at issue the failure of the manufacturer to exercise reasonable care to warn of dangers ie the manufacturers negligence is the only recognized basis of liability
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: had probable cause to believe that she did. See Lincoln v. Shea, supra at 5 n.l. We therefore proceed to the usual inquiry whether the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff supports a finding that probable cause was lacking. 11 We have no occasion to compare “probable cause” for this purpose with “probable cause” justifying various actions in criminal prosecutions. 12 Cf. Burnham v. Collateral Loan Co., 179 Mass. 268, 275 (1901) (investigation unnecessary where it would be immaterial to crime suspected); Keefe v. Johnson, 304 Mass. 572, 578 (1939) (investigation unnecessary where there is no one of whom to inquire). 13 The test articulated by the Restatement is in accord with the law of a number of other jurisdictions. See Watzek v. Walker, 14 Ariz. App. 545, 548-549 (1971) (<HOLDING>); Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Kincaid, 335 So. 2d Options: A. holding that investigation was insufficient prior to prosecution for forgery of check B. holding a 24month sentence for forgery unconstitutional because it exceeded the maximum sentence that the defendant could have received for a more serious forgery conviction C. holding that notice of judgment was insufficient D. holding that a payment made by certified check rather than the customary regular check was outside the ordinary course of dealings between the parties E. holding that the fact that an indiana prosecutor was later designated a special deputy united states attorney for purposes of the federal prosecution was insufficient to establish a sham prosecution

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that investigation was insufficient prior to prosecution for forgery of check