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: This Agreement contains the entire agreement between Cboe and Employee, and supersedes any and all other previous agreements, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof, including, without limitation, the Prior Agreement. No amendment or modification of the terms of this Agreement shall be binding upon either of the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by each of the parties hereto.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: sufficient to stimulate communication with the attorney, then there is no reason for the privilege to attach. Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Beyond the general framework of addressing the privilege where in-house counsel is involved, as set forth above, it is also important in this case to consider how courts have addressed the privilege in the insurance context. We thus recognize that when a communication between an insurance company and its attorney deals with the issue of coverage under a policy, including when the communication references the investigation undertaken to facilitate the rendering of legal advice on coverage, such communication is typically privileged. See Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Super. Ct., 153 Cal.App.3d 467, 476, 200 Cal.Rptr. 471, 476 (1984) (<HOLDING>); Hartford Fin. Servs. Grp., Inc. v. Lake Cnty. Options: A. holding that retention of an attorney to investigate an insurance claim and make a coverage determination under a policy is a classic example of a client seeking legal advice from an attorney B. holding an attorney is an agent of the client and therefore cannot conspire with the client C. recognizing that an attorney has a duty of loyalty to his client D. holding that if documents are privileged in the hands of the client they retain that privilege when given to an attorney for the purpose of seeking legal advice E. holding that a document which is given to an attorney in the course of seeking legal advice is privileged in the hands of the attorney only if it was privileged in the hands of the client

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that retention of an attorney to investigate an insurance claim and make a coverage determination under a policy is a classic example of a client seeking legal advice from an attorney
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As a condition to the grant of these Restricted Shares, you agree to repatriate all amounts attributable to the Restricted Shares in accordance with local foreign exchange rules and regulations in your country of residence (and country of employment, if different). In addition, you also agree to take any and all actions, and consent to any and all actions taken by the Company, the Employer and the Company’s local Affiliates, as may be required to allow the Company, the Employer and the Company’s local Affiliates to comply with local laws, rules and regulations in your country of residence (and country of employment, if different). Finally, you agree to take any and all actions as may be required to comply with your personal legal and tax obligations under local laws, rules and regulations in your country of residence (and country of employment, if different).

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Nonetheless, it is sometimes the case that litigants can make no credible showing that the affected practice is either central or important in their religious scheme. See Henderson, 253 F.3d at 17. In such cases, the de minimis burden imposed by the challenged law is not constitutionally cognizable. Id. In other cases, in which the practice at issue is indisputably an important component of the litigants’ religious scheme, see, e.g., City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. at 531, 113 S.Ct. at 2225-26 (noting that petitioners’ assertion that anima 109 S.Ct. 2136, 2148-49, 104 L.Ed.2d 766 (1989)). Nor is it a matter of adjudicating intrafaith differences in practice or belief. See Thomas v. Review Bd. of the Ind. Employment Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707, 716, 101 S.Ct. 1425, 1431, 67 L.Ed.2d 624 (1981) (<HOLDING>). Instead, a court may determine whether the Options: A. holding insurer not liable for bad faith when it denied insureds claim based on a good faith dispute regarding the interpretation of a rule B. holding that imposition of punishment is a judicial function C. recognizing judicial immunity for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction D. holding that trial courts have the power to sanction parties for bad faith abuse of the judicial process not covered by rule or statute E. holding that it is not within the judicial function and judicial competence to inquire whether the petitioner or another member of his faith more correctly perceived the commands of their common faith because courts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that it is not within the judicial function and judicial competence to inquire whether the petitioner or another member of his faith more correctly perceived the commands of their common faith because courts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation
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: Reardon understood Edwards’ consent to include the container that he carried was reasonable and not plainly wrong. To the extent to a search of “the contents and containers” of their vehicle. 14 Va.App. at 851, 419 S.E.2d at 868. Although this consent did not expressly include the trunk, they did not object or withdraw consent when the officer searched the trunk of the car. Id. We thus held that the defendants’ acquiescence in the search of the trunk clarified that their consent included the trunk. See id. Likewise in Rison, the defendant claimed that the trooper exceeded the scope of his consent to lding that failure to withdraw consent was evidence that defendant consented to search in progress); cf. Hughes v. Commonwealth, 31 Va.App. 447, 458, 524 S.E.2d 155, 161 (2000) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). Edwards’ initial consent to the search of his Options: A. holding that the defendant voluntarily consented to a search and the patdown of his person did not exceed the scope of his consent which included a search of the groin area B. holding that once initial consent to search has been given passive acquiescence broadens the scope of search C. holding that acquiescence to a strip and body cavity search did not extend the scope of defendants consent to search his person because of the highly intrusive nature of the search D. holding that search of backpack constituted a search of defendants person and was not authorized by search warrant for premises E. holding that a visual body cavity search requires probable cause and a search warrant

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that acquiescence to a strip and body cavity search did not extend the scope of defendants consent to search his person because of the highly intrusive nature of the search
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and (iii). Such an interpretation requires the statute to be read in the conjunctive (i.e., “(i) and (ii); or (i) and (in)”). Conversely, the Government argues that the statute must be read as containing three co-equal, dependent clauses. The Government’s interpretation requires the statute to be read in the disjunctive (i.e, “(i), or (ii), or (iii)”). Under a disjunctive reading, proof of any one of the three subsections suffices in a prosecution for trafficking in analogue. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has not addressed this precise issue. In fact, when presented the issue, the Eleventh Circuit chose not to resolve it, finding that the substance at issue satisfied both subparagraphs (i) and (ii). United States v. Fisher, 289 F.3d 1329 (11th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Only four District Courts and no Courts of Options: A. holding factor b is not unconstitutionally vague B. holding statute unconstitutionally vague as applied to mere possession of money on jail premises C. holding that attorney disciplinary rule was unconstitutionally vague as applied D. holding that these congressional pronouncements also confirm bds status as a controlled substance analogue E. holding that the analogue act was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to classify unlisted substance gbl as an analogue of ghb

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the analogue act was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to classify unlisted substance gbl as an analogue of ghb
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Notwithstanding the foregoing, (i) you and your Representatives will not be required to delete, erase or destroy any Evaluation Material contained in an archived computer backup system stored as a result of automated back-up procedures (it being agreed that you and your Representatives will not access such archived computer files containing any such Evaluation Material after such delivery or destruction is otherwise required) and (ii) you and/or your Representatives may retain one copy of the Evaluation Material (and may only access any such Evaluation Material) to the extent and for so long as such retention and access by you or such Representative, as applicable, is required by law or regulation; provided, however, that in the case of each of clauses (i) and (ii) of this sentence, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, you and your applicable Representatives will continue to be bound by the terms of this Agreement as if it were in full force and effect with respect to any such Evaluation Material for so long as you or your applicable Representatives retain any such Evaluation Material.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Either party hereto may by written notice to the other (i) extend the time for the performance of any of the obligations or other actions of the other under this. Agreement, (ii) waive compliance with any of the conditions or covenants of the other contained in this Agreement and (iii) waive or modify performance of any of the obligations of the other under this Agreement. Except as provided in the preceding sentence, no action taken pursuant to this Agreement, including, without limitation, any investigation by or on behalf of either party, shall be deemed to constitute a waiver by the party taking such action of compliance with any representations, warranties, covenants or agreements contained herein. The waiver by either party hereto of a breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach and no failure by either party to exercise any right or privilege hereunder shall be deemed a waiver of such party’s rights or privileges hereunder or shall be deemed a waiver of such party’s rights to exercise the same at any subsequent time or times hereunder.

assistant: 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: skype is making the software available to you for download only on the condition that you certify that you are not such a person or entity and that the download is not otherwise in violation of us export control and sanctions regulations .

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 waiver of any provision hereof shall be binding upon a party unless such waiver is expressly set forth in a written instrument which is executed and delivered by or on behalf of the waiving party by an officer of, or authorized representative for, such party. Such waiver shall be effective only to the extent specifically set forth in such written instrument. Neither the exercise (from time to time and at any time) of, nor the delay or failure (at any time or for any period of time) to exercise, any right or remedy shall constitute a waiver of the right to exercise, or impair, limit or restrict the exercise of, such right or remedy or any other right or remedy at any time and from time to time thereafter. No waiver of any right or remedy shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other right or remedy or shall, except to the extent so waived, impair, limit or restrict the exercise of such right or remedy.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Johnson, 497 F.3d 1151, 1153 n. 1 (10th Cir.2007). 2 . In this application, Mr. Ciocchetti asserts that his attorneys were ineffective not only for failure to competently cross-examine Mr. Ferguson, but also for "fail[ure] to investigate the facts and interview witnesses who would have verified” his account. Aplt. Combined Opening Br. & COA Appl. at 17. Beyond this cursory reference, however, Mr. Ciocchetti makes no effort to develop his failure-to-investigate claim, and, therefore, we will not address it further. See Bronson v. Swensen, 500 F.3d 1099, 1104 (10th Cir.2007) ("[W]e routinely have declined to consider arguments that are not raised, or are inadequately presented, in an appellant’s opening brief.”); see also Mathews v. McKune, 133 Fed.Appx. 512, 514 (10th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). 3 . Mr. Ciocchetti faults the district court Options: A. holding that the court has discretion not to consider an issue abandoned on appeal B. recognizing that the appellants claim on appeal had been abandoned because although his motion for a coa briefly asserted the claim he did not brief the issue C. holding that the appellant waived his claim on appeal because he failed to address that claim in either his application for a coa or his brief on appeal D. holding that issues not raised in an appellants initial brief are deemed abandoned E. holding that petitioners claim asserted in a subsequent brief was not waived due to omission from the coa application

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the appellants claim on appeal had been abandoned because although his motion for a coa briefly asserted the claim he did not brief the issue
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: below, the additional mitigation evidence that might have been uncovered is not compelling when weighed against the case in aggravation. The compelling aggravation case included evidence of eight sexual assaults, and the jury had just convicted Heishman of a calculated, cold-blooded murder of another rape victim to prevent her from testifying-a truly heinous crime. Thus, even if Heishman had offered the additional evidence of his difficult upbringing, he has not shown a reasonable probability that the jury would have imposed a sentence of life without parole. See, e.g., Wong v. Belmontes, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 383, 390, 175 L.Ed.2d 328 (2009) (per curiam) (finding no prejudice where the aggravation evidence was “simply overwhelming”); Rhoades v. Henry, 596 F.3d 1170, 1195 (9th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). Counsel’s investigation of Heishman’s Options: A. holding that ineffective assistance of counsel occurs when there is deficient performance and prejudice which is a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different B. holding that for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim to be established a defendant must show that but for counsels error the outcome of his proceedings would have been different C. holding that to establish prejudice there must be a reasonable probability that but for counsels unprofessional errors the result of the proceeding would have been different D. holding that petitioners newly proffered facts add too little and the aggravating circumstances are too strong to make it reasonably probable that the sentencing decision would have been different but for counsels performance E. holding that to establish stricklandpierce prejudice in the appellate representation context the petitioner must show that there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of the direct appeal proceeding would have been different but for counsels deficient performance

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that petitioners newly proffered facts add too little and the aggravating circumstances are too strong to make it reasonably probable that the sentencing decision would have been different but for counsels 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: Subject to Section 2.19(a), the Borrower shall give the Administrative Agent and the applicable LC Issuer notice prior to 10:00 a.m. (New York City time) at least three (3) Business Days (or such shorter period of time as the Borrower and the related LC Issuer may agree upon) prior to the proposed date of issuance or Modification of each Facility LC, specifying the beneficiary, the proposed date of issuance (or Modification) and the expiry date of such Facility LC, and describing the proposed terms of such Facility LC and the nature of the transactions proposed to be supported thereby. Upon receipt of such notice, the Administrative Agent shall promptly notify the relevant LC Issuer and each Lender of the contents thereof and of the amount of such Lender’s participation in such proposed Facility LC. The issuance or Modification by any LC Issuer of any Facility LC shall, in addition to the conditions precedent set forth in Article IV (if, in the case of a Modification, such Modification renews, increases the amount of, or extends the expiry date of a Facility LC), be subject to the conditions precedent that such Facility LC shall be satisfactory to such LC Issuer and that the Borrower shall have executed and delivered such application agreement and/or such other instruments and agreements relating to such Facility LC as such LC Issuer shall have reasonably requested in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to such LC Issuer (each, a “Facility LC Application”). No LC Issuer shall have any independent duty to ascertain whether any of the applicable conditions set forth in Article IV have been satisfied; provided , however , that no LC Issuer shall issue a Facility LC if, on or before the proposed date of issuance, the relevant LC Issuer shall have received notice from the Administrative Agent or the Required Lenders that any such applicable condition has not been satisfied or waived. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the terms of any Facility LC Application, the terms of this Agreement shall control.

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: Administrative Code states: Sale of tangible personal property to real property contractors ... is generally subject to tax. Further: [Sjales of materials and supplies to contractors and subcontractors are taxable transactions as sales to final consumers. Utah AdmimCode R865-19-58S (1990). A final consumer is one who “converts the personal property into real property ... since he is the last one to own it as personal property.” Id. The contractor is taxed as the ultimate consumer because real property sales are not taxable and thus the sale of raw materials would escape taxation upon being converted into real property if the ultimate consumer were not taxed. See Niederhauser Ornamental & Metal Works Co. v. State Tax Comm’n, 858 P.2d 1034, 1038 (Utah App.1993), cert. den. 870 P.2d 957 (<HOLDING>). Consequently, in Tummurru Trades, Inc. v. Options: A. holding that forfeiture of real property may be adjudicated before the seizure occurs because real property cannot abscond B. holding contractor ultimate consumer because real property sale not taxed thus contractor taxed to avoid stream of products incorporated into real property from escaping sales tax altogether C. holding that a tax appeal on real property is a lien on the real estate and not a personal obligation of the landowner D. holding utpa does not apply to real property sales E. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property

assistant: The best answer is B. holding contractor ultimate consumer because real property sale not taxed thus contractor taxed to avoid stream of products incorporated into real property from escaping sales tax altogether
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in support of their motion, he insists that the Court cannot consider them, and the Privacy Policy in particular, on the ground that his claim does not depend on their contents. Pl.’s Opp’n at 13-14. The Court disagrees. Plaintiff alleges that he signed up to use Zimride but never consented to the disclosure of his personal information. But to use Zimride, Plaintiff necessarily had to agree with Zimride’s TOS and Privacy Policy, which clearly state that such information may, in fact, be disclosed. Because Plaintiffs claim necessarily depends on the application of Zimride’s policies — which relate directly to the issue of consent — the Court finds that these documents may appropriately be considered on a motion to dismiss. See Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1076 (9th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); Parrino v. FHP, Inc., 146 F.3d 699, 706 (9th Options: A. holding that a mere passing reference or even references however to a document outside the complaint does not on its own incorporate the document into the complaint itself citation omitted B. holding that a court may consider a document submitted by a defendant in determining whether to dismiss the complaint because it was integral to and explicitly relied on in the complaint and because the plaintiffs do not challenge its authenticity C. holding that a court ruling on a motion to dismiss may consider a document that is referenced in the complaint and is central to the plaintiffs claims D. holding that in connection with a motion to dismiss the court may consider a document not attached to the pleadings where the plaintiffs claim depends on the contents of a document the defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss and the parties do not dispute the authenticity of the document even though the plaintiff does not explicitly allege the contents of that document in the complaint E. holding that when a complaints factual allegations are expressly linked and admittedly dependent upon a document the authenticity of which is not challenged that document effectively merges into the pleadings and the trial court can review it in deciding a motion to dismiss under rule 12b 6

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that in connection with a motion to dismiss the court may consider a document not attached to the pleadings where the plaintiffs claim depends on the contents of a document the defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss and the parties do not dispute the authenticity of the document even though the plaintiff does not explicitly allege the contents of that document in the complaint
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In order to induce Buyer to enter into this Agreement and consummate the Contemplated Transactions, Powell represents and warrants to Buyer that no claims are alleged or could be alleged in that certain lawsuit styled EM1 Labs, LLC v. Relay Medical, LLC; Relay Capital, LLC; Individualized Treatment Technology Laboratories, LLC; Endeavor Global Partners (HK), LTD.; Jeffrey Powell; Allison Powell; Robert M. Dunn; & Sheree Moore; pending in The Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit In and For Broward County, Florida, Civil Division, Case Number CACE17009641, which, if successful, would in any way impair his ability to perform his obligations to the Company pursuant to the employment contract to entered into by him and the Company as set forth in Article 6.1(p)(i) hereof.

assistant: Representations
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 for such filings as may be required under the HSR Act or to obtain the DOT Conditional Approvals and except as set forth on Schedule 6.5 (the “ Required Consents ”), no filing or notice with, and no permit, authorization, consent, exemption, order or approval of, any Authority or other Person is necessary with respect to any of the Companies or the Company Subsidiary for the consummation by Sellers of the transactions contemplated hereby and the other Transaction Documents to which they are or will be parties.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that “there was a chance of me getting out and starting a new life”; and (2) the deal that Florida offered Ashley gave him complete immunity from prosecution on the burglary and murder charges in exchange for his testimony against Mills. We hold that this cross-examination exposed Ashley’s prior inconsistent statements and bargain with Florida to the extent that the jury could judge his credibility and Mills could argue effectively that Ashley’s testimony was not credible. Mills’s lawyer engaged in sufficient cross-examination, and the trial judge neither abused his discretion nor violated the Confrontation Clause in limiting the cross-examination to that which the attorney-client privilege did not protect. See, e.g., United States v. Perez-Tosta, 36 F.3d 1552, 1563 (11th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Taylor, 17 F.3d 333, 340 Options: A. holding that criminal defendants are entitled to obtain for impeachment purposes statements made by government witnesses to government agents that relate to the subject matter of the witnesses direct testimony B. holding that defendants absence from and defense counsels restriction to written questions in hearing on competency of child complainant did not violate confrontation clause C. holding that sentencing court did not violate defendants due process rights when it reasonably refused to recall a witness for crossexamination D. holding that despite district courts restriction on crossexamination of government witness concerning the sentencing benefits he would earn through testifying for the government it did not violate defendants confrontation rights because of defense counsels effective impeachment of the government witnesses credibility and sentence reduction E. holding that the district court did not err in instructing the jury not to draw any adverse inferences from the governments failure to call a witness because the witness did not have a relationship with the government such that one would expect him to give testimony in favor of the government

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that despite district courts restriction on crossexamination of government witness concerning the sentencing benefits he would earn through testifying for the government it did not violate defendants confrontation rights because of defense counsels effective impeachment of the government witnesses credibility and sentence reduction
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: arguments or cites no new authority that raises the specter of a reversal on appeal. Here, the Court is unconvinced that the character of the potential injuries described in Zurich’s motion and reply is truly irreparable so as to justify the extraordinary relief sought. In its motion, Zurich states that “if the [Memorandum Opinion and] Order is not stayed pending appeal, LCC might distribute funds held in reserve that would be used to satisfy Zurich’s administrative claim” (Doc. # 47 at p. 8). Zurich’s claim for administrative expense priority status, at its core, is one for monetary recovery. The monetary harm that Zurich would allegedly suffer if the stay was denied does not constitute irreparable harm. See Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S. 61, 90-91, 94 S.Ct. 987, 39 L.Ed.2d 166 (1974) (<HOLDING>). In this case, it is undisputed that the Options: A. holding that monetary damages do not generally constitute irreparable harm B. holding that the potential loss of valuable business may constitute irreparable harm C. holding damages do not constitute other equitable relief D. holding that loss of customers and resulting injury to goodwill can constitute irreparable harm that is not compensable by an award of money damages E. holding potential damage to reputation to constitute irreparable harm

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that monetary damages do not generally constitute irreparable harm
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: action.”); ORS 652.200 (providing for attorney fees for prosecution of an action for the collection of wages). As we understand plaintiff’s contention, it is that, because attorney fees were available and awarded in the underlying wage claim, under ORCP 68 A(l) fees are also available in the UFTA action, as an action to enforce the judgment on the wage claim and, therefore, as “services related to the prosecution or defense of’ the underlying wage claim. Plaintiff is correct that we have previously said that fees incurred in the collection of a judgment on a claim for which attorney fees are available are encompassed within “attorney fees,” as defined in ORCP 68 A(l) as fees “related to the prosecution or defense of an action.” See Holder v. Elg, 151 Or App 329, 332, 948 P2d 763 (1997) (<HOLDING>); Johnson v. Jeppe, 77 Or App 685, 688, 713 P2d Options: A. recognizing that the party seeking attorney fees bears the burden of proving entitlement to those fees B. holding attorney lacked standing to challenge amount of attorney fees awarded plaintiffs not parties to the appeal C. recognizing a partys right to receive postjudgment fees for collection when the original judgment awarded that party attorney fees D. holding that the insured was entitled to prejudgment and postjudgment interest and attorney fees as found by the jury E. holding a summary judgment to be final although motion to assess attorney fees remained pending because award of attorney fees is collateral to judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing a partys right to receive postjudgment fees for collection when the original judgment awarded that party attorney fees
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by Title IX, as someone who was a potential witness to the assault on Jane Doe IV and the retaliation against Mr, Bowles. To support this argument, the plaintiffs cite T.L. v. Sherwood, 68 F.Supp.3d 1295, 1314-15 (D.Or.2014), which in turn cites to Thompson v. N. Am. Stainless, LP, 562 U.S. 170, 131 S.Ct. 863, 178 L.Ed,2d 694 (2011) and Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High Sch. Dist., 768 F.3d 843 (9th Cir.2014). As explained in Sherwood, however, these cases only permit zone-of-interest recovery for plaintiffs who are close enough to the person who engaged in the protected activity that the court could find that the protected activity was the plaintiff’s own or that the retaliation against the plaintiff was intended to actually harm that person. See Sherwood, 68 F.Supp.3d at 1314-1315 (<HOLDING>). The court finds that the zone-of-interest Options: A. holding that a title vii retaliation claim was not properly before the court because although the plaintiff had not been fired when he filed his complaint the plaintiff never amended his complaint to include a claim of retaliation based on his termination B. holding that student plaintiffs could bring retaliation claims where they were allegedly retaliated against for complaints made by their parents on their behalf and noting that ollier allowed the same and that thompson allowed a retaliation claim by a plaintiff who was fired because his fiancee who was also his coworker engaged in protected activity and firing him was intended to harp her C. holding that plaintiff was not similarly situated to another employee who also engaged in protected activity for purposes of plaintiffs retaliation claim D. holding that the plaintiff failed to show retaliation where there was no evidence that the employees who disciplined him knew of his protected activity E. holding that an employee who was terminated after his fiancee filed a charge of discrimination had standing to sue employer for retaliation where his fiancee was employed by the same company

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that student plaintiffs could bring retaliation claims where they were allegedly retaliated against for complaints made by their parents on their behalf and noting that ollier allowed the same and that thompson allowed a retaliation claim by a plaintiff who was fired because his fiancee who was also his coworker engaged in protected activity and firing him was intended to harp her
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: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Seller agree to sell the Shares, and the Purchaser shall purchase the Shares, for a total of Three Hundred Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars USD ($375,000.00) (the “ Purchase Price ”). This is a private transaction between the Seller and Purchaser.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Agreement, the balance of the Restricted Stock Units that have not vested pursuant to paragraphs 3 or 4 will be forfeited and cancelled automatically on the first to occur of (a) the date the Employee’s Continuous Status as an Employee is interrupted or (b) the Termination Date set forth on first page of this Agreement.

assistant: 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: ANY LITIGATION BASED HEREON, OR ARISING OUT OF, UNDER, OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT, SHALL BE BROUGHT AND MAINTAINED EXCLUSIVELY IN THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK OR IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK; PROVIDED THAT ANY SUIT SEEKING ENFORCEMENT AGAINST ANY COLLATERAL OR OTHER PROPERTY MAY BE BROUGHT, AT THE AGENT’S OPTION (AT THE DIRECTION OF THE REQUIRED LENDERS), IN THE COURTS OF ANY JURISDICTION WHERE SUCH COLLATERAL OR OTHER PROPERTY MAY BE FOUND. EACH LOAN PARTY HEREBY EXPRESSLY AND IRREVOCABLY SUBMITS TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FOR THE PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH LITIGATION AS SET FORTH ABOVE. EACH LOAN PARTY FURTHER IRREVOCABLY CONSENTS TO THE SERVICE OF PROCESS BY REGISTERED MAIL, POSTAGE PREPAID, OR BY PERSONAL SERVICE WITHIN OR WITHOUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK. EACH LOAN PARTY HEREBY EXPRESSLY AND IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ANY OBJECTION WHICH IT MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE TO THE LAYING OF VENUE OF ANY SUCH LITIGATION BROUGHT IN ANY SUCH COURT REFERRED TO ABOVE AND ANY CLAIM THAT ANY SUCH LITIGATION HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN AN INCONVENIENT FORUM.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: On termination, Concordia University shall pay Greenwood Hall in full for all Greenwood HallServices rendered up to and including the termination date, any accrued interest on past due amounts, and any other sums due hereunder, all of which shall be paid in accordance with the normal payment schedule set forth in Section 4.5.1.

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 Guarantor and each of its Subsidiaries (i) is duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the jurisdiction of its incorporation, (ii) has the corporate power and authority, and the legal right, to own and operate its property, to lease the property it operates as lessee and to conduct the business in which it is currently engaged, (iii) is duly qualified under the laws of each jurisdiction where its ownership, lease or operation of property or the conduct of its business requires such qualification, except where the failure to be so duly qualified could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, and (iv) is in compliance with all Requirements of Law and Contractual Obligations, except any non-compliance which could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and Mr. Sledge.” Officer Smith then observed a third officer run over to the group, and testified the four individuals “went down to the ground in a pile.” In describing Sledge’s actions, Officer Clarke testified that during the encounter Sledge (1) “was yelling, screaming, upset and irate when he was arrested”; (2) made several threats after he was arrested and handcuffed; (3) “wasn’t very cooperative in that he was moving his arms”; and (4) exhibited “resistive angry behavior.” Carriker testified Sledge attempted to get away from the officers twice, and stated “the first time handcuffs were not used,” but “[t]he second time, they were.” On these facts, probable cause existed to believe Sledge was resisting arrest. See State v. Campbell, 260 Neb. 1021, 620 N.W.2d 750, 757 (2001) (<HOLDING>). Thus, even assuming arguendo the detention Options: A. holding an arrestee who resists being handcuffed and struggles with officers may be convicted of resisting arrest under nebraska law B. holding that police seizure of weapon in plain view even though appellant was handcuffed and under the control of the officers was lawful because there were other occupants in the house who were not handcuffed and who would have had access to the weapon C. holding avoiding arrest is not the same as resisting arrest D. holding that resisting arrest is lesser offense of assault on an officer E. holding that an officers noncompliance with the strip search statute was not a defense to resisting an officer with violence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding an arrestee who resists being handcuffed and struggles with officers may be convicted of resisting arrest under nebraska 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: Arevalo’s wife. He will testify that Mindy told him that Arevalo had asked her to tell him to tell Castillo and Jacobo to get out of town because they were wanted by law enforcement. He will also testify that in mid-June of 1999, Mindy told Gonzales that Arevalo wanted Gonzales to get rid of “the things” which Gonzales understood to mean the guns. She also told him that an associate of the City Terrace gang known as “Clarence” was in possession of the guns. The statements to get out of town and to get the guns are instructions. Instructions cannot be either true or false. An instruction may contain an implied assertion but it is not itself an assertive statement and thus is not hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(a)(2). United States v. Zenni, 492 F.Supp. 464, 469 (E.D.Ky.1980) (<HOLDING>). The statements that Castillo and Jacobo are Options: A. holding that the rejection of the exculpatory hearsay testimony of a government witness was in error particularly in view that accusatory hearsay was admitted B. holding that the district court did not err in relying on hearsay evidence where the government offered reasons why its hearsay evidence had indicia of reliability and the court considered the reliability of the evidence in deciding the weight to give the hearsay evidence C. holding that an objection on hearsay grounds did not preserve for appeal an exception to the hearsay rule that was not specifically raised D. holding that betting instructions placed over the phone to a government agent are not hearsay E. holding that the employer was not the insurers agent

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that betting instructions placed over the phone to a government agent are not hearsay
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 unaudited balance sheet of as of June 30, 2016 and the related statements of income and retained earnings for the period then ended fairly present the financial position of ACQUIRED COMPANY as of the date of the balance sheet included in the financial statements, and the results of its operations for the period indicated.

assistant: Financial Statements
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: resulted in involuntary servitude responding to the illegal activities of the Defendants and his coworkers. Plaintiffs thereby request of this honorable court the restitution called laims against Revenue Agent Sothen and his co-workers in their official capacities, I agree that the United States must be substituted as the proper defendant. The Petition also names the Internal Revenue Service as a defendant. The Internal Revenue Service is not an entity capable of being sued. Posey v. United States Dept. of the Treasury—Internal Revenue Service, 156 B.R. 910, 917 (W.D.N.Y.1993)(stating that “suit against the IRS or the Treasury Department is not available in federal court”); Krouse v. United States Government Treasury Dept. Internal Revenue Service, 380 F.Supp. 219, 221 (C.D.Cal.1974) (<HOLDING>). A suit purporting to bring claims against the Options: A. holding that the trial court should have dismissed the employees breach of contract claim B. holding that if the federal claims are dismissed before trial the state claims should be dismissed as well C. holding that the department of the treasury and the internal revenue service are not entities subject to suit and they should be dismissed D. holding that district court appropriately dismissed suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when the case was moot E. holding that 1 the njcfa applies to corporations and other business entities when they are acting as consumers because business entities are considered a person under the act and no reason exists to treat it differently and 2 to be a consumer in respect to a transaction the business entity must be one who uses the goods and thereby diminishes their economic utility

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the department of the treasury and the internal revenue service are not entities subject to suit and they should be dismissed
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, together with the schedules and exhibits hereto, or delivered pursuant hereto, are intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement and intended to be a complete and exclusive statement of the agreement and understanding of the parties hereto in respect of the subject matter contained herein and therein. There are no restrictions, promises, warranties or undertakings, other than those set forth or referred to herein or therein. This Agreement, together with the schedules and exhibits hereto, or delivered pursuant hereto, supersede all prior agreements and understandings between the parties with respect to such subject matter.

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: As of the date hereof, there are no Proceedings pending or, to the Knowledge of the Seller, threatened, against such Seller-Related Party or to which such Seller-Related Party is otherwise a party or, to the Knowledge of the Seller, a threatened party, challenging the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents or otherwise relating to such transactions, the Purchased Units or the Transaction Documents.

assistant: Litigations