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: 760 F.2d at 531 n. 3; Jack B. Weinstein & Margaret A. Berger, Weinstein’s Evidence § 608(5) (1993). Each of these purposes should be secondary to the overriding purpose of Rule 404(b): admission of evidence probative of a material issue in the case. In the case at bar, the district court followed its “usual practice” of evaluating Rule 404(b) evidence at the end of the government’s ease-in-chief. The district court at that time stated that the issue of intent had not yet been put in issue. In so ruling, the district court overlooked the fact that intent was an element of both of the charged conspiracies, and thus was an issue relevant to the government’s burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt. See Estelle v. McGuire, — U.S. -, -, 112 S.Ct. 475, 481, 116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991) (<HOLDING>). While we hold it would have been preferable Options: A. holding that when two underlying offenses are charged in an indictment for capital murder the state need only prove one of the two offenses to support the conviction B. holding that when defendants plead not guilty the government is required to prove all elements of charged offenses including intent C. holding that when a defendant charged with conspiracy enters a not guilty plea he makes intent a material issue in the case and imposes a substantial burden on the government thus the government may introduce extrinsic offenses which qualify under 404b to prove defendants state of mind unless defendant takes affirmative steps to remove the issue of intent from the case D. holding defendant by pleading guilty admits all essential elements of offense charged E. holding that facts required language of article 3709 section one means the evidence legally required to prove the elements of charged offense

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that when defendants plead not guilty the government is required to prove all elements of charged offenses including intent
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 number and age(s) of the accused’s family members, whether the accused requested waiver, any debts owed by the accused, the ability of the accused’s family members to find employment, and the availability of transitional compensation for abused dependents permitted under 10 U.S.C. 1059. (3) For the purposes of this Rule, a "dependent” means any person qualifying as a "dependent” under 37 U.S.C. 401. R.C.M. 1101(d). The President has not directed that a convening authority’s decision concerning waiver of forfeitures for dependent support be subject to judicial review, nor has he imposed a requirement that the convening authority’s denial of waiver of forfeitures be in writing or that it be served on the accused. See United States v. Quintin, 47 M.J. 798, 801 (N.M.Ct.Crim.App.1998) (<HOLDING>). 5 . See also R.C.M. 1101(c) analysis at Options: A. holding that a state may waive its sovereign immunity B. holding that futility is among the reasons for denying leave to amend a complaint C. holding that there is no requirement for a convening authority to state reasons for denying a request to waive forfeitures D. holding that trial court acted within its discretion in denying defendants request for firstoffender treatment when there was no indication that trial court refused to consider request or erroneously believed that such was not permitted E. holding that before denying petition trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing and state specific reasons for denying the petition

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that there is no requirement for a convening authority to state reasons for denying a request to waive forfeitures
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: At the request of the Company and without further consideration, the Note Holders will execute and deliver such other instruments of conversion, transfer, conveyance, assignment and confirmation as may be reasonably requested in order to effectively convert, transfer, convey and assign to the Company for conversion, the Payout Notes and to release any security interest in the Company’s assets that constitutes collateral for the Company’s obligations under the Payout Notes.

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: beneficiaries, he is not afforded the personal right of self-representation. Secondly, the Texas Legislature has defined the practice of law to include, among other things, “the preparation of pleadings or other documents incident to an action or special proceeding or the management of the action or proceeding on behalf of a client before a judge in court....” Consistent with that legislative mandate, Relator’s appearance in the trial court in his capacity as trustee falls within this definition of the “practice of law.” Accordingly, if a non-attorney trustee appears in court on behalf of the trust, he or she necessarily represents the interests of others, which amounts to the unauthorized practice of law. See Ziegler v. Nickel, 64 Cal.App.4th 545, 549, 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 312 (1998) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, we conclude the trial court did Options: A. holding that the unauthorized practice of law constitutes violation of code B. holding that creditors of a trust beneficiary were prohibited from intervening in an action involving a dispute between the trustee and a beneficiary concerning distribution of the trust corpus C. holding that a nonattorney trustee who represents the trust in court is representing and affecting the interest of the beneficiary and is thus engaged in the unauthorized practice of law D. holding that the beneficiary of a trust was not the real party in interest regarding rights owned by the trust E. holding that under the supremacy clause a state court could not enforce a prohibition on the unauthorized practice of law against an individual who was permitted to practice law under the rules of a federal court located in the states jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a nonattorney trustee who represents the trust in court is representing and affecting the interest of the beneficiary and is thus engaged in the unauthorized practice of law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: rule is to be applied are so complex and varying that no rule adequately addressing the relevance of all these facts can be spelled out," id. at 989; (2) whether "the situation to which the legal principle is to be applied is sufficiently new to the courts that appellate judges are unable to anticipate and articulate definitively what factors should be outcome determinative," id.; (8) whether "the trial judge has observed 'facts,' such as a witness's appearance and demeanor, relevant to the application of the law that cannot be adequately reflected in the record available to appellate courts," id.; and (4) whether there are policy reasons that weigh for or against granting discretion to district courts, such as when substantial constitutional rights are implicated, see id. at 988-39 (<HOLDING>); see also State v. Brake, 2004 UT 95, ¶¶ Options: A. recognizing such balance of interests B. holding that the fourth amendment and the exclusionary rules are not implicated by a private search C. holding there is no consent as a matter of law where the consent was given under coercion D. holding that there is no violation of the fourth amendment when the government reasonably believed that the individual giving consent to the search had authority to do so E. recognizing the interest of having uniform legal rules regarding consent to search given the substantial fourth amendment interests lost as a result of such consents as a policy reason opposing a grant of discretion to the district court

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing the interest of having uniform legal rules regarding consent to search given the substantial fourth amendment interests lost as a result of such consents as a policy reason opposing a grant of discretion to the district court
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: ed.2009). Alaskasland cited this definition in its opposition to the Realtors' motion to dismiss and in its summary judgment opposition, relied on a similar definition in its motion for partial summary judgment, and repeats these three elements to us on appeal. 24 . See infra Section IV.B. 25 . 17 U.S.C. § 301(a). 26 . See 17 U.S.C. § 101. 27 . 'This is similar to the argument in Del Madera Properties v. Rhodes & Gardner, Inc., involving a real estate development company that brought misappropriation and unjust enrichment claims based on allegations that a competitor had misappropriated a tentative subdivision map, "supporting documents, an Wedgwood, 601 F.Supp. at 1535. 31 . 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102(5), 106(1), (3), (5), 301(a). See also Ehat v. Tanner, 780 F.2d 876, 878 (10th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). 32 . To claim infringement one must first Options: A. holding copyright act preempted photographers misappropriation claim when claim did not have extra element such as breach of fiduciary duty B. holding misappropriation claim by real estate information service provider against website using services photographs was preempted by copyright act because claim had no extra element C. holding in suit between film and photograph archive companies that copyright act preempted misappropriation claim and pllaintiffs could not by nsiscasting their causes of action secure the equivalent of copyright protection under guise of state law D. holding that even if utah law recognized tort of misappropriation such a claim would be preempted by copyright act E. holding misappropriation claim grounded solely in the copying of a plaintiffs protected expression was preempted by 301 of copyright act

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that even if utah law recognized tort of misappropriation such a claim would be preempted by copyright 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you will not use the service to distribute , promote or otherwise publish any material containing any solicitation for funds ( which has not been formally approved by betterpoints.uk ) , advertising or solicitation for goods or 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No specific provision contained in this Note shall limit or modify any more general provision contained herein. This Note shall be deemed to be jointly drafted by the Company and all purchasers of Notes pursuant to the Facility Agreement and shall not be construed against any Person as the drafter hereof.

assistant: Construction
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: deliberations.” (citing Gardner v. Malone, 60 Wn.2d 836, 840, 376 P.2d 651, 379 P.2d 918 (1962))). ¶10 Later case law specified what matters inhere in the verdict and cannot be considered: The mental processes by which individual jurors reached their respective conclusions, their motives in arriving at their ver diets, the effect the evidence may have had upon the jurors or the weight particular jurors may have given to particular evidence, or the jurors’ intentions and beliefs, are all factors inhering in the jury’s processes in arriving at its verdict, and, therefore, inhere in the verdict itself, and averments concerning them are inadmissible to impeach the verdict. Cox v. Charles Wright Acad., Inc., 70 Wn.2d 173, 179-80, 422 P.2d 515 (1967); see also Gardner, 60 Wn.2d at 841-42 (<HOLDING>). ¶11 Reynoldson argues that the facts that the Options: A. holding that thirdparty guilt evidence may also be excluded where it does not sufficiently connect the other person to the crime as for example where the evidence is speculative or remote or does not tend to prove or disprove a material fact in issue at the defendants trial quotation omitted B. holding that allegation that jurors had omitted to consider important evidence or issues or had by any other motive or belief been led to their decision is insufficient to support a motion for a new trial quoting 8 john henry wigmore evidence in trials at common law 2349 at 681 mcnaughton rev ed 1961 C. holding that a party had failed to preserve an argument for appellate review when that party had failed to argue the issue to the trial court either at trial or in his postjudgment motion D. holding inmates evidence failed to prove that decision maker had an improper motive E. holding other crimes evidence admissible to show motive where motive was put in issue by defense at trial

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that allegation that jurors had omitted to consider important evidence or issues or had by any other motive or belief been led to their decision is insufficient to support a motion for a new trial quoting 8 john henry wigmore evidence in trials at common law 2349 at 681 mcnaughton rev ed 1961
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: v. Sharp, 700 F.2d 749, 750-52 (1st Cir.1983) (permitting suit by families to prevent termination of Medicaid benefits vis-a-vis stepchildren). That jurisprudence includes several cases holding that the Eleventh Amendment does not bar suits seeking prospective injunctive relief against state actors relative to EPSDT benefits. E.g., Mitchell v. Johnston, 701 F.2d 337, 344 (5th Cir.1983); Stanton v. Bond, 504 F.2d 1246, 1251 (7th Cir.1974). This line of cases seems solidly embedded in constitutional terrain left undisturbed by Seminole Tribe. Reversing these precedents would require a dramatic — -and unwarranted — departure from both the common understanding of Ex parte Young and its historic role in administering the Social Security Act. We note, too, that our holding (6th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>); Joseph A. ex rel. Corrine Wolfe v. Ingram, Options: A. holding that the cwa does not include a remedial scheme sufficient to preclude an ex parte young action B. holding that ex parte young permitted injunctive relief in equal protection challenge to states distribution of public school land funds because the expenditure of state funds that might accompany the injunction did not amount to an award for monetary liability C. holding that the medicaid act does not provide the type of detailed remedial scheme that would supplant an ex parte young action D. holding that existence of a detailed remedial scheme shows congressional intent to prohibit recourse to the ex parte young fiction E. holding that the medicaid act provision allowing reduction of funds to noncompliant states is not a detailed remedial scheme sufficient to show congresss intent to preempt an action under ex parte young

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the medicaid act provision allowing reduction of funds to noncompliant states is not a detailed remedial scheme sufficient to show congresss intent to preempt an action under ex parte young
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 testify was well within the bounds of the court’s discretion. We are likewise unpersuaded by Valiav-icharska’s related argument that the court erroneously curtailed her cross-examination of Sergeant Jewell. Valiavicharska’s counsel was allowed to ask Sergeant Jewell a broad range of questions about the escalating conflict between the police and demonstrators during the protest, and the court did not unfairly constrain the scope of cross-examination. To the extent the magistrate judge limited Valiavicharska’s cross-examination of Sergeant Jewell at all, she did so only to prevent unduly prejudicial, cumulative, and otherwise irrelevant testimony. Imposing these reasonable limitations was not an abuse of discretion. See Carriger v. Lewis, 971 F.2d 329, 332-33 (9th Cir.1992) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). AFFIRMED. ** This disposition is not Options: A. recognizing that trial courts have great latitude and considerable discretion to determine necessary and proper jury instructions B. holding that trial court retains wide latitude and considerable discretion to limit crossexamination internal quotation marks omitted C. recognizing district courts wide latitude in imposing supervised release conditions D. recognizing that we review a trial courts jury instruc tions for abuse of discretion and that a district court abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law internal quotation marks omitted E. holding that compliance with rule 3 is both a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite to appeal internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that trial court retains wide latitude and considerable discretion to limit crossexamination internal quotation marks omitted
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: this case to the standa ore the United States Coast Guard has an effect within the sovereign territory insofar as the agency’s function is compromised and the laws that agency seeks to enforce undermined. RCCL next argues that § 1001 is not properly invoked because the United States has enacted a more specific “false statement” law, APPS, regulating the specific conduct at issue, and thus cannot elect instead to proceed under 18 U.S.C. § 1001. The principle of statutory construction that a specific statute is given precedence over a more general statute addressing the same conduct is invoked by Defendant to suggest that APPS, with its penalty provisions, is the proper statute under which to proceed. See, e.g., Simpson v. United States, 435 U.S. 6, 15, 98 S.Ct. 909, 55 L.Ed.2d 70 (1978) (<HOLDING>); see also San Pedro v. United States, 79 F.3d Options: A. recognizing the principle that gives precedence to the terms of the more specific statute where a general statute and a specific statute speak to the same concern B. recognizing that a specific statute controls over a general one C. holding that specific statutes create exceptions to general statutes therefore if a provision of a specific statute is inconsistent with one in a general statute on the same subject the specific statute controls D. holding that a general statute is superseded by a more recent specific statute only if the two statutes are in conflict E. holding that gl1956 43326 embodies a policy of statutory construction that requires courts to give precedence to a specific statute over a general statute when the two are in conflict

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the principle that gives precedence to the terms of the more specific statute where a general statute and a specific statute speak to the same concern
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth on Schedule 7.2(f) , Seller’s Designated Representative has not received written notice from any governmental authority of any violation of any Law applicable to Seller or the Hotel, including without limitation, any zoning, environmental, labor or employment laws, that has not been corrected. Except as set forth on Schedule 7.2(f) , Seller’s Designated Representative has not received written notice of any third party claim related to Environmental Liabilities with respect to the Property.

assistant: Compliance With 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: Micron shall have the right to have an independent Third Party auditor audit [***], upon reasonable advance written notice, during normal business hours and on a confidential basis subject to an obligation of confidentiality, all records and accounts of NTC relevant to the calculation of Micron IP Royalties in the [***] period immediately preceding the date of the audit; provided, however , NTC shall not be obligated to provide any records and book of accounts existing prior to the Exercise Date. NTC shall, for at least a period of [***] from the date of their creation, keep complete and accurate records and books of accounts concerning all transactions relevant to calculation of Micron IP Royalties in sufficient detail to enable a complete and detailed audit to be conducted. In the event any such audit determines that Micron IP Royalties have been underpaid by more than [***] U.S. dollars ($[***] USD) in any one [***], NTC shall promptly pay Micron such underpayment amount, together with interest, and reimburse Micron for its reasonable costs and expenses of the audit.

assistant: Records
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 dispute.” Stewart, 74 Cal.L.Rev. at 1283. We conclude that Missouri has a stronger interest in this litigation than does Jamaica. B. Application of Substantive Law Applying Missouri’s choice of law rules, the district court concluded Jamaican substantive law applied to this dispute, which neither party disputes. In fact, Reid-Walen specifically bases her claim that the Hansens breached their duty of care on several Jamaican statutes. The district court did not conclude it would have particular difficulty applying Jamaican law. Jamaica’s substantive law is descended from that of Great Britain, and contains concepts that are at least somewhat akin to our own. In addition, there is no language barrier to the district court understanding Jamaican law. See Rudetsky, 660 F.Supp. at 348 (<HOLDING>). Although the district court concluded that Options: A. holding less than twothirds of the stock B. holding that a party relying on foreign law must plead and prove it and partys failure to do so entitles court to assume that foreign law is the same as forum law C. holding under texas version of the recognition act that public policy exception is not triggered simply because the body of foreign law upon which the judgment is based is different from the law of the forum or because the foreign law is more favorable to the judgment creditor than the law of the forum D. holding that court should be less reluctant than usual to apply foreign law when there is no language barrier E. holding that apprendi does not apply where the defendant was sentenced to less than the statutory maximum

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that court should be less reluctant than usual to apply foreign law when there is no language barrier
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: compelling governmental interest.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-l(a). It is well-established that “ 'the failure in a complaint to cite a statute, or to cite the correct one, in no way affects the merits of a claim. Factual allegations alone are what matters.’ " Northrop v. Hoffman of Simsbury, Inc., 134 F.3d 41, 46 (2d Cir.1997) (quoting Albert v. Carovano, 851 F.2d 561, 571 n. 3 (2d Cir.1988) (en banc)); see also Newman v. Silver, 713 F.2d 14, 15 n. 1 (2d Cir.1983) ("[Fjederal pleading ... is by statement of claim, not by legal theories.”); Brown v. City of Oneonta, 235 F.3d 769, 783 & n. 4 (Calabresi, J., dissenting from denial of rehearing en banc) (same). 3 . Although McEachin does not name the guard as a defendant, further inquiry into whether this pro se plaintiff was, indeed Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>) ("We recognize[ ] that requiring a believer to Options: A. holding that denial of inmates request for bread and peanut butter so that he could prepare his sunday meals in his cell on saturday thereby avoiding preparing food or benefitting from the preparation of food by others on the sabbath violated prisoners free exercise rights B. holding that prisons policy of supplying orthodox jewish inmates with one frozen kosher dinner supplemented with nonkosher vegetarian or nonpork meals violated prisoners free exercise rights C. holding a muslim prisoners free exercise claim failed because even though the prison did not provide him with halal meat he could comply with his religious requirements by simply eating a vegetarian meal and therefore the disputed policy did not force the prisoner to violate his religion D. holding that prison officials failure to accommodate inmates meal requirements during ramadan violated his free exercise rights E. holding that when an inmates religious views requiring a vegetarian diet are sincerely held prison policy may violate his free exercise rights even though vegetarianism is only a recommended not a required element of plaintiffs religion seventhday adventism

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that prisons policy of supplying orthodox jewish inmates with one frozen kosher dinner supplemented with nonkosher vegetarian or nonpork meals violated prisoners free exercise rights
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and Employee’s employment hereunder shall continue during the Term and thereafter until terminated as provided herein. Upon termination of this Agreement and Employee’s employment hereunder, Employee shall immediately resign from any officer, director or other position in which she is serving on behalf of the Company or any Affiliate, and shall tender her resignation as a director of any and all Affiliates of the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: whose unborn child is killed”); Kan. Stat. Ann. § 65-6703(e) ("A woman upon whom an abortion is performed shall not be prosecuted under this section....”); Ky.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 507A.010(3)("nothing in this chapter shall apply to any acts of a pregnant woman that caused the death of her unborn child”); La. Rev.Stat. Ann. § 14:87(A)(2) (penalties for criminalized abortions not applicable to pregnant women having abortions); Minn.Stat. § 609.266 (excluding the "pregnant woman” from liability for "crimes against unborn children”); Neb.Rev.Stat. § 28-335 (providing "[n]o civil or criminal penalty ... against the patient upon whom the abortion is performed”); Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 2919.17(I)(expressly excluding women from liability for post-viability abortions); 18 Pa. Cons. , 1224 (2005) (<HOLDING>); Hill-man v. State, 232 Ga.App. 741, 503 Options: A. holding a fetus is not a child person or individual for purposes of criminal prosecution under the reckless injury to a child statute B. holding for purposes of establishing the offense of reckless manslaughter against a pregnant woman a fetus is not a person C. holding that the definition of person in the hawaii manslaughter statute did not include a fetus and thus did not apply when a woman caused the death of her fetus by smoking crystal methamphetamine D. holding an unborn viable fetus is not a human being under the new mexico child abuse statute and the mothers use of cocaine during pregnancy was not child abuse E. holding that a woman possessed immunity from criminal prosecution for causing injury or death to her fetus

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the definition of person in the hawaii manslaughter statute did not include a fetus and thus did not apply when a woman caused the death of her fetus by smoking crystal methamphetamine
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: (1946); Draper v. United States, 164 U.S. 240, 17 S.Ct. 107, 41 L.Ed. 419 (1896); United States v. McBratney, 104 U.S. 621, 26 L.Ed. 869 (1881). Thus, under the IGCA, the criminal laws of the United States apply to offenses committed in Indian country by non-Indians against Indians and by Indians against non-Indians; “[section] 1152 establishes federal jurisdiction over interracial crimes only.” United States v. Prentiss, 256 F.3d 971, 974 (10th Cir.2001) (per curiam) (en banc). The exception in the IGCA preserves the right of tribal courts to try offenses committed in Indian country by Indians against Indians, while recognizing that Indian tribes generally do not have jurisdiction over non-Indians. See Oliphant, 435 U.S. at 195-206 & n. 8, 98 S.Ct. 1011; see also 25 U.S.C. § 1302(2)(<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court has interpreted the Options: A. recognizing the inherent power of indian tribes to exercise criminal jurisdiction over all indians B. holding that indian tribes could only exercise criminal jurisdiction over tribal members and not other indians C. holding that state of south dakota does not have criminal jurisdiction over indians in indian country D. holding that an indian tribes exercise of criminal jurisdiction over nonindians is inconsistent with the domesticdependent status of the tribes and that tribes may not assume such jurisdiction without congressional authorization E. holding that indian tribes lack tribal jurisdiction over crimes committed by nonmember indians within the tribes reservation

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing the inherent power of indian tribes to exercise criminal jurisdiction over all indians
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 circumstances surrounding Bria’s birth. Thus, we focus on the trial court’s determination that Dr. Warner’s affidavit was insufficient to rebut Defendants’ motion for summary judgment because he lacked familiarity with the stan dard of medical care ordinarily used by medical practitioners in the locality and his affidavit failed to set forth facts to indicate a basis for his opinion that Defendants acted negligently. In Pharmaseal the supreme court has indicated that a physician or surgeon from another locality may be competent to testify regarding the standard of care required of a defendant physician or surgeon practicing in New Mexico. See Alfonso v. Lund, 783 F.2d 958, 962 (10th Cir.1986) (construing Pharmaseal); cf. Fabianke v. Weaver, 527 So.2d 1253, 1257-58 (Ala.1988) (<HOLDING>). Pharmaseal invests the trial court with broad Options: A. holding that covenants prohibition on the employeedoctor from practicing health care of every nature and kind was unreasonable where the doctor had been employed to practice in the specialty of ophthalmology B. holding that a 1983 action against a sheriff made the state of alabama a real party in interest C. holding physician in action based on illegal cavity search to standard of a reasonable physician D. holding that a doctor was qualified under daubert to give an expert opinion on standard of medical care based on thirty years of experience as a practicing boardcertified cardiologist and his review of the medical records E. recognizing competency of obstetriciangynecologist practicing in philadelphia pennsylvania to testify regarding standard of care in calculating delivery date in action brought against general or family physician practicing in red bay alabama

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing competency of obstetriciangynecologist practicing in philadelphia pennsylvania to testify regarding standard of care in calculating delivery date in action brought against general or family physician practicing in red bay alabama
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 sentencing judge for most offenses under the sentencing guidelines. Id. at 19. Petitioner acknowledged that his mind was clear and that he knew exactly what he was doing during the plea hearing. Id. at 33. The Court found that Petitioner was in full possession of his faculties, that he was competent to plead guilty, and that he understood the nature of the charges against him as well as the maximum penalty provided by law. Id. at 39. Given these circumstances, the Court finds no merit to Petitioner’s contentions that he did not understand the nature of the plea agreement or that he believed he would only be given probation. By Petitioner’s own admissions, his attorney had informed him of the mandatory minimum sentence. See Baker v. United States, 781 F.2d 85, 90 (6th Cir.1986)(<HOLDING>) (citations omitted). Even if Petitioner’s Options: A. holding that where a defendant expressly manifested his belief in the truth of the statements contained in the motion to dismiss thereby adopting those statements as his own such statements are admissible against the defendant in the states case in chief B. holding that the defendant was denied due process because the procedural rule was not followed in any respect by the trial court C. holding that this court is required to assume that the jury followed the limiting instructions given by the district court D. holding that where the court has scrupulously followed the required procedure the defendant is bound by his statements in response to that courts inquiry E. holding that the decision of the appellate court establishes the law of the case and it must be followed by the trial court on remand

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that where the court has scrupulously followed the required procedure the defendant is bound by his statements in response to that courts inquiry
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: which has a four year statute of limitations. See 810 ILCS 5/2-725(1) (Smith-Hurd 1992). To determine if the UCC applies, I must ask whether the contract “was predominantly one for the sale of goods with services incidentally involved, or was one for the rendition of services with the sale of goods incidentally involved.” Republic Steel Corp. v. Penn. Engineering Corp., 785 F.2d 174, 181 (7th Cir.1986) (applying Illinois law). Tyr-Ree entered the contract to obtain tire pyrolysis and shredding equipment which Shred Pax was to manufacture. The services Shred Pax agreed to perform, including installation, testing, and storage, were all important elements of the contract, but the Purchase Order was predominantly a contract for the sale of goods. See Republic Steel Corp., 785 F.2d 174 (<HOLDING>); Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co. v. Brookhaven Options: A. holding that a contract for the design construction and installation of a water tank was predominantly a contract for the sale of goods under the ucc B. holding that a contract for the design manufacture and installation of two furnaces was predominantly a contract for the sale of goods and therefore subject to the uccs fouryear statute of limitations C. holding that the validity of a contract for a commission for the sale of real estate is determined by the law of the state where the contract is made D. holding that the measure of damages for the breach of a contract of sale where no fraud is shown is the difference between the contract price and the market price of the goods on the date of the breach E. holding that an attorney approval clause in a contract for the sale of real estate was a part of that contract and would have to be satisfied for the underlying contract to be enforceable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a contract for the design manufacture and installation of two furnaces was predominantly a contract for the sale of goods and therefore subject to the uccs fouryear statute of limitations
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: claims under various [Bankruptcy] Code provisions” when the debtor seeks to bring other claims, such as common-law claims. Id. Similarly, we have held that a reservation of “any claims ... arising under Chapter 5 of the Bankruptcy Code or any similar provisions of state law” is not sufficiently specific to reserve state-law claims for fraud or breach of fiduciary duty; the reference to “state law” is too general. In re SI Restructuring, 714 F.3d at 865. However, a reservation of claims is effective if it identifies the nature of the claims reserved and the class of potential defendants against whom those claims might be pursued — a precise identification of each individual potential defendant is unnecessary. See In re Tex. Wyo. Drilling, Inc., 647 F.3d 547, 549, 551-52 (5th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). The law may well be different in the Ninth Options: A. holding majority shareholder liable when he used his control of the board for the malicious purpose of preventing dividends and otherwise lowering the value of the stock of the minority shareholders B. holding sufficient a reservation of claims against various prepetition shareholders of the debtor who might be sued for fraudulent transfer and recovery of dividends paid to shareholders C. holding that derivative actions do not require the support of a majority of shareholders or even all of the minority shareholders D. holding a shareholders cause of action accrued for statute of limitations purposes when shareholders and directors of a company asserted a right to stock which was hostile to the plaintiffs claim to the stock E. holding that the trustee could not bring a claim against sole shareholders of bankrupt corporation where shareholders had not looted or otherwise injured the corporation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding sufficient a reservation of claims against various prepetition shareholders of the debtor who might be sued for fraudulent transfer and recovery of dividends paid to shareholders
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 M" of section 40-11.5-102(4) "shall be presumed prima facie evidence of an independent contractor relationship between the parties to the lease." Section 40-11.5-102(4) further provides that this presumption may be overcome by clear and convincing evidence of an employment relationship between the parties to the lease "considering only factors not in the lease." Contrary to the position taken in the Panel's answer brief, we conclude that, under qualifying cireumstances, the presumption of an independent contractor relationship under section 40-11.5-102(4) could apply to the determination of the status of a worker as an employee or independent contractor for unemployment tax liability purposes. See Frank C. Klein & Co. v. Colo. Comp. Ins. Auth., 859 P.2d 323, 325-26 (Colo.App.1993) (<HOLDING>); see also Ch. 296, see. 1, § 40-11.5-102, 1990 Options: A. holding that the trial courts authority to initiate workers compensation benefits before the final adjudication was not divested by the legislature and was consistent with the stated purpose of the workers compensation act B. holding that provisions of section 40115102 are applicable to the determination of the status of truck drivers as employees or independent contractors under the workers compensation act and discussing legislative history indicating intent to apply these provisions both to workers compensation and unemployment compensation matters C. holding that the parties choiceoflaw agreement as relating to workers compensation was appropriately avoided where it offended state public policy as reflected in express provisions of the pennsylvania workers compensation act D. holding that legislature clearly intended that workers compensation act and unemployment security act be construed together thus prohibiting worker from receiving both unemployment compensation and workers compensation payments for same period E. holding that the provisions of the workers compensation act must be satisfied or the action is not maintainable in the courts

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that provisions of section 40115102 are applicable to the determination of the status of truck drivers as employees or independent contractors under the workers compensation act and discussing legislative history indicating intent to apply these provisions both to workers compensation and unemployment compensation matters
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: divide those functions into three categories: investigative, advocatory (or prosecutorial), and adjudicative. Although there is little potential for bias when the investigative and advocato-ry functions are combined, the potential for impermissible bias when either the investigative or the advocatory function is combined with the adjudicative function is more readily apparent, see Allison, Process-Value Analysis at 1167-68, particularly as the case becomes more accusatory in nature. Id. at 1180. The natural suspicion is that adjudicators may be disposed to act favorably toward their employers. In a formal criminal context, for instance, it would be inappropriate for an adjudicator to be employed as a part-time prosecutor. Cf. State v. Brown, 853 P.2d 851, 856-57 (Utah 1992) (<HOLDING>). Nevertheless, examining the question in the Options: A. holding that defense counsel was not constitutionally ineffective for presenting a diminished capacity defense as opposed to a defense of legal insanity B. holding that a prosecutor was disqualified from bringing a recidivist proceeding even though the prior offenses in which the prosecutor served as defense counsel were public matters C. holding parttime prosecutor barred from acting as defense counsel D. holding absolute immunity protects prosecutor from liability for failing to give defense counsel materially exculpatory evidence E. holding that the district court abused its discretion in denying the defendants timely motion for the substitution of the participating prosecutor in order to permit the defense to call the prosecutor as a witness

assistant: The best answer is C. holding parttime prosecutor barred from acting as defense counsel
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 agrees to indemnify and hold the Executive harmless to the fullest extent permitted by the laws of the State of Delaware and under the bylaws of the Company, both as in effect at the time of the subject act or omission. In connection therewith, the Executive shall be entitled to the protection of any insuran ce policies which the Company elects to maintain generally for the benefit of the Company’s directors and officers, against all costs, charges and expenses whatsoever incurred or sustained by the Executive in connection with any action, suit or proceeding to which the Executive may be made a party by reason of his being or having been a director, officer or employee of the Company. This provision shall survive any termination of the Executive’s employment hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement will become effective on the eighth day after the date on which the Executive signs a waiver and release in the form attached as Exhibit I to this Agreement (the “Release”), but only if the Executive has signed this Agreement and the Release within the timeframe described in Section 3(a) and has not revoked the Release during the seven-day revocation period described in the Release.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Participant shall forfeit and disgorge to the Company any Restricted Shares granted or vested and any gains earned or accrued due to the sale of any Shares to the extent required by Applicable Law or regulations in effect on or after the Effective Date, including Section 304 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Section 10D of the Exchange Act. For the avoidance of doubt, the Committee shall have full authority to implement any policies and procedures necessary to comply with Section 10D of the Exchange Act and any rules promulgated thereunder. The implementation of policies and procedures pursuant to this Section 6(f) and any modification of the same shall not be subject to any restrictions on amendment or modification of Awards. Awards granted under the Plan (and gains earned or accrued in connection with Awards) shall also be subject to such generally applicable policies as to forfeiture and recoupment (including, without limitation, upon the occurrence of material financial or accounting errors, financial or other misconduct or Competitive Activity) as may be adopted by the Administrator or the Board from time to time and communicated to Participants. Any such policies may (in the discretion of the Administrator or the Board) be applied to outstanding Awards at the time of adoption of such policies, or on a prospective basis only.

assistant: Forfeitures