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: THE PARTIES HEREBY WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED HEREBY, WHETHER NOW EXISTING OR HEREAFTER ARISING, AND WHETHER SOUNDING IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE. THE PARTIES AGREE THAT ANY OF THEM MAY FILE A COPY OF THIS PARAGRAPH WITH ANY COURT AS WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF THE KNOWING, VOLUNTARY AND BARGAINED-FOR AGREEMENT AMONG THE PARTIES IRREVOCABLY TO WAIVE TRIAL BY JURY AND THAT ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING WHATSOEVER BETWEEN OR AMONG THEM RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED HEREBY SHALL INSTEAD BE TRIED IN A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION BY A JUDGE SITTING WITHOUT A JURY.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, comply with all laws, ordinances or governmental rules or regulations to which each of them is subject, including, without limitation, ERISA and all Environmental Laws, and will obtain and maintain in effect all licenses, certificates, permits, franchises and other governmental authorizations necessary to the ownership of their respective properties or to the conduct of their respective businesses, in each case to the extent necessary to ensure that non-compliance with such laws, ordinances or governmental rules or regulations or failures to obtain or maintain in effect such licenses, certificates, permits, franchises and other governmental authorizations could not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. The Borrower will maintain in effect and enforce policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance by the Borrower, its Subsidiaries and their respective directors, officers, employees and agents with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions.

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: The representations, warranties, covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement by Buyer are true, correct and complete and shall be deemed remade by Buyer as of the Closing, with the same force and effect as if made at that time. All representations, warranties, covenants and agreements of Buyer contained in this Article 10 , as well as the right and the ability of Seller to enforce them and/or seek damages for their breach, shall survive the Closing for a period of twelve (12) months. All claims, whether known or unknown, for breach by Buyer of a representation or warranty as set forth in this Article 10 must be asserted in writing by Seller and delivered to Buyer on or before the expiration of such twelve (12) month period or otherwise such claims shall be invalid and of no force or effect and Buyer shall have no liability with respect thereto.

assistant: Survival
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: affirm. 1 . Rizzo is incorrect that the linguistic difference between § 507(a)(8)(E) and subsection (a)(8)(C) — which excludes taxes "required to be collected or withheld and for which the debtor is liable in whatever capacity " — matters. Id. (emphasis added). This portion of subsection (a)(8)(C) simply codifies what the Supreme Court had already held in United States v. Sotelo, 436 U.S. 268, 98 S.Ct. 1795, 56 L.Ed.2d 275 (1978): that, even in the absence of such statutory language, a debtor's derivative liability for corporate taxes is non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. Id. at 274-75, 278-81, 98 S.Ct. 1795. 2 . This principle is not at all alien to the federal system, as federal tax obligations have been interpreted in an identical manner. See Galletti, 541 U.S. at 123, 124 S.Ct. 1548 (<HOLDING>); United States v. Holmes, 727 F.3d 1230, 1235 Options: A. holding that cause of action for malpractice did not arise until the tax deficiency was assessed because prior to assessment the plaintiff had not been injured B. holding that a derivatively liable corporate officer need not be separately assessed because the consequences of the assessment attach to the tax debt without reference to the special circumstances of the secondarily liable parties C. holding that a corporate officer signing a contract in his corporate capacity is generally not liable for damages under the contract D. holding that the assessment is given the force of a judgment and if the amount assessed is not paid when due administrative officials may seize the debtors property to satisfy the debt E. holding a corporate officer individually liable without piercing the corporate veil because he specifically directed sanctioned and actively participate in the maintenance of the nuisance

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a derivatively liable corporate officer need not be separately assessed because the consequences of the assessment attach to the tax debt without reference to the special circumstances of the secondarily liable parties
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: Licensee acknowledges and agrees that due to the unique nature of the Licensed Technical Information and other Confidential Information of Licensor, there can be no adequate remedy at law for any breach of its obligations hereunder, which breach may result in irreparable harm to Licensor, and therefore, that upon any such breach or any threat thereof, Licensor shall be entitled to appropriate equitable relief, including injunction, without the requirement of posting a bond, in addition to whatever remedies it might have at law.

assistant: Enforcements
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 expiration of the applicable Performance Cycle, the Administrator shall determine and certify in writing the extent to which the Performance Goals established pursuant to this Section 10 have been achieved and the percentage of the participant’s individual target award that has been vested and earned. Following the Administrator’s determination and certification in accordance with the foregoing, the Section 162(m) Award or other Performance Award shall become vested and payable (or deferred, in the case of deferred stock units) in accordance with the terms and conditions of the applicable award agreement. With respect to any Section 162(m) Award, the Administrator shall be precluded from having discretion to increase the amount of compensation payable under the terms of such Award. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Administrator may, in its sole discretion, award an amount less than the earned Performance Awards and/or subject the payment of all or part of any Performance Award to additional vesting, forfeiture and deferral conditions as it deems appropriate.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: could not function as such without a toner cartridge. Hence, the cartridges function as an integral part under Willoughby Camera. It is also undisputed that the toner cartridges were dedicated solely for use with Mita photocopiers. Thus, the toner cartridges also meet the Pompeo standard. Therefore, the Court concludes that under the standards set forth in Bauerhin Tech., the toner cartridges are properly considered parts under the HTSUS. See also Mattel, Inc. v. United States, 61 Cust. Ct. 75, 82 n.5, 287 F. Supp. 999, 1004 n.5 (1968) (“[I]t is of course obvious that if an item is dedicated solely for use on a particular article and is essential to the functioning of that article, it is a fortiori a ‘part’ of that article. ”); Bruce Duncan Co. v. United States, 63 Cust. Ct. 412 (1969) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, lexicographic and scientific Options: A. holding that engine parts later used to make engines were properly classified as parts B. holding that imported butane cartridges were properly classified as parts of cigarette lighters because these speciallydesigned cartridges were necessary for the operation of the lighter C. holding that a variable annuity is properly classified as a security D. holding that for purposes of gri 2a essential character analysis incomplete merchandise as imported does not have the essential character of the complete or finished article the ability to strain salt from water and thus cannot be classified as straining cloth E. holding that apprendi was not triggered because the defendants were sentenced to terms of imprisonment that were within the maximum penalties for the rico offenses that they were found guilty of committing

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that imported butane cartridges were properly classified as parts of cigarette lighters because these speciallydesigned cartridges were necessary for the operation of the lighter
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: human being who had little chance of living, and if so, could go through whatever life it had deformed and maimed.” Id. Similarly, Defendants also assert the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria, i.e., “rational people with full knowledge of the hazards entailed who choose to engage in [a] dangerous undertaking must assume personal responsibility therefore.” Id. at 31 (citing Zachardy v. Geneva College, 733 A.2d 648 (Pa.Super.1999)). Defendants argue that if the doctrine is not applied, their accountability will be unlimited, “and [Plaintiffs] assume no personal responsibility.” Brief for Appellants at 31. We acknowledge the continuing vitality of the assumption of risk doctrine remains in doubt. Zeidman v. Fisher, 980 A.2d 637, 640 (Pa.Super.2009); see also Montagazzi, 994 A.2d at 635 (<HOLDING>). Regardless, “the question of assumption of Options: A. holding that duty to protect from criminal acts does not arise in the absence of a foreseeable risk of harm B. recognizing that the assumption of the risk operates merely as a corollary of the absence of a duty C. recognizing primary assumption of risk as a viable doctrine D. recognizing that fiduciary liability requires not onlya repose of trust but an assumption of a duty and breach of that duty E. holding that assumption of the risk is not an available defense for civil battery

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the assumption of the risk operates merely as a corollary of the absence of a duty
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If a Participant terminates from employment , the Participant’s vested Accrued Benefit shall be deferred to the earliest of the Participant’s death, Total and Permanent Disability or attainment of Normal Retirement Age, at which time such vested benefit shall be payable in accordance with Sections 13.06 and 13.13.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a serious lease violation is defined as including, but not limited to, a failure to pay rent or other amounts due under the lease or a repeated violation of the terms and conditions of the lease. 24 C.F.R. 982.310(a)(1). It is not clear to this Court that a late payment or a partial payment is a “failure to pay” within the meaning of the HUD regulation. The parties have not offered any legal authority on this point. See In re Adoption of Doe, 100 N.M. 764, 765, 676 P.2d 1329, 1330 (1984) (explaining that where a party cites no authority to support an argument, we may assume no such authority exists). We further recognize that a mere failure to timely pay lease obligations may be cured by late tender. See City of Albuquerque v. Brooks, 114 N.M. 572, 574, 844 P.2d 822, 824 (1992) (<HOLDING>). {25} In this case, although Tenant’s payments Options: A. recognizing laches as an equitable defense to a motion to reopen B. recognizing that the determination is an equitable one C. holding that equitable tolling principles apply to suits against the united states in the same manner as they apply to private parties D. recognizing that in cases involving public housing it is an equitable defense and the court may apply equitable principles for the nonpayment of back rent to prevent eviction of a qualified indigent tenant E. holding that equitable principles apply to child support proceedings

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that in cases involving public housing it is an equitable defense and the court may apply equitable principles for the nonpayment of back rent to prevent eviction of a qualified indigent tenant
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: facts indicate that the administrator was influenced by a conflict. The fact that Attorney Reice did not respond to the plaintiffs letters requesting a review is inapposite; the claim had already been denied by Mr. Dennis Jones, a pension specialist, prior to referral to Attorney Reice. Also, the timing of the amendment to the pension plan alone, without more, is insufficient for the court to impute a sinister motive to the defendant. Thus, plaintiff is left with the unextraordinary evidence that defendant and administrator were one in the same, and that the parties were at odds, which does not convince the court that the decision to deny benefits to plaintiff was in fact motivated by a conflict of interest. See Boesel v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 62 F.Supp.2d 1015, 1030 (W.D.N.Y.1999) (<HOLDING>); but see Sullivan, 82 F.3d at 1256-57 Options: A. holding that a common employer and administrator does not necessarily influence the administrators decision B. recognizing that an employer had a dual role as administrator of plan and as employer and only the role of administrator was held to a fiduciary standard C. holding that evidence contrary to an administrators decision does not make the decision arbitrary and capricious so long as a reasonable basis appears for the decision D. holding that erisa does not require plan administrators to give special deference to treating physicians opinions although administrators may not arbitrarily refuse to credit them E. holding that under erisa a plan administrators decision to deny an employee longterm disability benefits is arbitrary and capricious if the administrator ignores favorable evidence and selectively reviews the evidence it does consider

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a common employer and administrator does not necessarily influence the administrators decision
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 size of Plaintiff's Exhibit, the Exhibit was designated a “bulky exhibit” by the Clerk's Office such that it is available for public viewing and copying in the Clerk’s Office but is not available electronically on ECF. See Docket Entry [33], Attachment 2. 5 . The Court notes that both Plaintiff and Defendants have submitted the unsealed transcript of the proceedings in Washington Gas Light Co. v. Samuel L. Alexander (Civil Case No. 622-04) before Judge Gary S. Gasparovic in the District Court for Charles County, Maryland, on April 21, 2004; Plaintiff's various filings in that case; and related orders issued by both the district and appellate courts in that case, all of which may be considered matters of public record. See In re Thomas H., 381 Md. 174, 187 n. 4, 848 A.2d 652 (2004) (<HOLDING>); Walker v. Warden of Maryland House of Corr., Options: A. holding that public meeting did not satisfy public participation requirement because public did not receive adequate notice B. holding that it may be decided as a matter of law C. holding that notice to the attorney of record constitutes notice to the petitioner D. holding that a notice because it was docketed should be considered a matter of public record E. holding that the court should make factual findings from the record evidence as if it were conducting a trial on the record

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a notice because it was docketed should be considered a matter of public record
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: under a “contract of employment, or a collective bargaining agreement, an agreement has yet been made to arbitrate the dispute.” Id. at 885. The court stated that to “decide otherwise, we would have to hold that Gilmer has no effect at all and that [Gardner-Denver ] is still the law that statutory claims cannot be the subject of required arbitration.” Id. at 882. 2. Plaintiffs ADEA and ADA Claims are not Barred by the CBA Defendants argue that Plaintiffs federal statutory claims are barred by the mandatory arbitration clause of the CBA. Defendants contend that the “Gilmer and Austin decisions represent the current thinking on the arbitration of statutory claims.” (Defs. Reply p. 5). In opposition to Defendants’ motion, Plaintiff cites Pryner v. Tractor Supply Co., 109 F.3d at 354 (<HOLDING>). Defendants dismiss Gardner-Denver and Pryner Options: A. holding that collective bargaining agreements cannot compel the arbitration of statutory rights B. holding that arbitration pursuant to collective bargaining agreement is not res judicata and cannot collaterally estop a civil rights claim C. holding that the claim accrued after the employer denied a request for arbitration as untimely under the collective bargaining agreement D. holding that agreements other than fullfledged collective bargaining agreements may be contracts within the meaning of 301 E. holding that antidiscrimination rights under title vii cannot be waived by a collective bargaining agreement

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that collective bargaining agreements cannot compel the arbitration of statutory 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: keeper in October 2003. Am. Compl. ¶ 39. To the extent Plaintiffs attempt to assert a claim based upon the initial selection of Retirement Services as record keeper (see Am. Compl. ¶¶ 76, 178), such claim is time-barred. Consequently, the Court will not consider Plaintiffs’ contention that In-sperity and Holdings should have selected the record keeper through a competitive bidding process. See Pl.’s Resp. to Insperity Mot. at 11. The Insperity Defendants’ motion to dismiss that portion of the Amended Complaint is GRANTED. However, because the majority of Plaintiffs’ assertions against Retirement Services concern its actions while operating as the record keeper, those allegations are not time-barred. See Tibble v. Edison Int’l, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1823, 1829, 191 L.Ed.2d 795 (2015) (<HOLDING>). 2. Whether All Insperity Defendants and Options: A. holding that filing an answer does not invoke the status as a defendant in plaintiffs lawsuit B. holding that the defendants had a continuing duty to review investments and that the action was not barred to the extent breaches occurred within six years of filing the complaint C. holding that as long as alleged breach of a continuing duty occurred within six years of the filing of the lawsuit the claim is timely D. holding that where the violation of the fdcpa was the filing of a lawsuit the statule of limitations begins to run on the date of filing E. holding breach of contract claim not preempted as a straightforward breach of contract action as it alleged violation of specific covenant

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that as long as alleged breach of a continuing duty occurred within six years of the filing of the lawsuit the claim is timely
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: abatement). However, under my view that our citizens have the right to an unbiased and impartial grand jury, a propter affectum challenge would be a proper means of contesting grand juror bias. Otherwise, the right rings hollow. 3. Challenging Grand Juror Bias Pursuant to OCGA § 17-7-110, “[a] 11 pretrial motions, including demurrers and special pleas, shall be filed within ten days after the date of arraignment, unless the time for filing is extended by the court.” This statute, which post-dates all the cases cited by the majority for the position that propter affectum challenges cannot be raised post-indictment, makes no distinction based on the type of motion, or whether the challenge is propter defectum or affectum. See State v. Dempsey, 290 Ga. 763, 765 (1) (727 SE2d 670) (2012) (<HOLDING>). Thus, a pretrial motion challenging grand Options: A. holding that a regulation implementing a statute that was no longer valid did not have a legislative foundation B. holding that recklessness even for fiduciaries is no longer sufficient C. holding that once a petitioners prior removal order has been reinstated he no longer qualifies for any relief under the ina regardless of whether his application was filed before or after the reinstatement decision was made D. holding that any prior requirement that a propter defectum challenge be made preindictment is no longer valid under ocga 177110 E. holding that twostep sequence is no longer an inflexible requirement

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that any prior requirement that a propter defectum challenge be made preindictment is no longer valid under ocga 177110
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: such termination of the services will result in the deactivation or deletion of your account or your access to your account , and the deletion of all content on your account .

assistant: Content removal
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 obligations of the Lender Parties to fund any Borrowing or to issue any Letter of Credit shall be effective on and as of the first date (the “ Closing Date ”) on which each of the conditions precedent set forth in this Section 4.1 shall have been satisfied.

assistant: Effectiveness
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 possession to occur, “possession must be ‘unequivocal, absolute and notorious, so that third parties may be advised.’ ” Hutchison, 726 F.2d at 302 (quoting Transp. Equip. Co. v. Guar. State Bank, 518 F.2d 377, 381 (10th Cir.1975)). Because there is no clear definition of possession, possession may be achieved in various ways. For instance, a secured party may perfect by actual possession, such as where the collateral is placed in the secured party’s hands through physical delivery to it or its agent, or another kind of notorious physical control. Secured Transactions Under the UCC at § 6A.03[1]. Alternatively, a secured party may establish possession where it controls the premises where the collateral is located. See In re Childress, 1969 WL 11001 (Bankr.E.D.Tenn. May 1, 1969) (<HOLDING>); Rosner v. Plaza Hotel Assoc., Inc., 146 Options: A. holding a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the constitution and laws of the united states to state a claim under 1983 B. holding that the secured creditor was only entitled to the amount of its claim as provided in the debtors chapter 13 plan when the destruction of the vehicle yielded insurance proceeds greater than the secured creditors claim C. holding that the secured party obtained possession to collateralized furniture and equipment within a restaurant when the debtor handed the restaurant keys to the secured party and left the premises D. holding that the words allowed secured claim in 506d refer to a claim that is secured by a lien and allowed under 502 E. holding that the meaning of allowed secured claim in 506a does not determine the meaning of allowed secured claim in 506d

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the secured party obtained possession to collateralized furniture and equipment within a restaurant when the debtor handed the restaurant keys to the secured party and left the premises
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 representation or warranty of the Borrower made in the Purchase Agreement, this Note, the Warrant described in the Purchase Agreement, the Pledge Agreement, the Security Agreement, the Intercreditor Agreement, the Irrevocable Transfer Agent Instructions, or in any agreement, statement or certificate given in writing pursuant hereto or in connection herewith or therewith shall be false or misleading in any material respect when made and the breach of which has (or with the passage of time will have) a material adverse effect on the rights of the Holder with respect to this Note or the Purchase Agreement.

assistant: Warranties
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 actual term of this Lease (as the same may be extended or earlier terminated in accordance with this Lease, the " Term ") shall commence on December 15, 2017 (the " Commencement Date ") and end on December 15, 2032, subject to extension or earlier termination of this Lease as provided herein.

assistant: Terms
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 Employment Term and Executive’s employment hereunder may be terminated under the circumstances set forth below; provided , however , that notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, Executive shall not be considered to have terminated employment with the Company for purposes of this Agreement unless Executive would be considered to have incurred a “separation from service” from the Company within the meaning of Section 409A of the Code.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment shall become effective, and this Amendment thereafter shall be binding on the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, as of the date first set forth above upon (a) execution and delivery of counterparts by the parties hereto and (b) delivery of an opinion of counsel to Finco and the Transferor with respect to true sale matters.

assistant: Effectiveness
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 Plan and this Agreement constitute the entire agreement of the parties and supersede in their entirety all prior undertakings and agreements of the Company, the Partnership and the Participant with respect to the subject matter hereof. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement embodies their final intent and understanding with respect to the implementation of the 2016 OPP and the grant of the Award, and supersedes all previous descriptions, discussions, agreements or other materials relating to the 2016 OPP.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: we may terminate your account ( s ) if we learn , or in good faith believe , that you are a registered sex offender , that accessing the service may violate a condition of parole or probation , that you have engaged in or attempted to engage in conduct with minors on the service that violates this agreement , or that you for any other reason may pose what we deem to be an unacceptable risk to the service community .

assistant: Unilateral termination
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: stem from personal injuries allegedly caused by a product (a drug), they are in fact product liability claims. Construed as such, Plaintiffs’ “misrepresentation” claims would fail for the same reason their “product liability” claims did: Plaintiffs did not allege that they were injured by the Brand Manufacturers’ product. Second, the district court found that even if the misrepresentation claims could be seen as distinct and separate from product liability claims, they would fail because Plaintiffs could not establish that the Brand Manufacturers owed them a legal duty. We must analyze whether Plaintiffs’ misrepresentation claims would stand under the laws of each implicated state, as required per Erie. See Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 78, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938) (<HOLDING>). When sitting in diversity, federal courts are Options: A. holding that a federal district court sitting in diversity must apply its forum states choice of law rules B. holding that federal courts sitting in diversity shall apply state substantive law C. holding that when applying state law a federal court is bound to follow the highest court in the state D. holding that in a diversity action a federal court must apply the law of the forum state E. holding that a federal court sitting in diversity is bound to follow the law of the forum state

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a federal court sitting in diversity is bound to follow the law of the forum state
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original (including electronic copies) but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Telecopies and PDFs of signatures shall be effective as manually executed originals.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you warrant that you are ( 1 ) not located in cuba , iran , north korea , sudan , or syria ; and ( 2 ) are not a denied party as specified in the regulations listed above .

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: Borrower shall pay Lender (a) the Facility Fee in the amount of $23,529 (the “Facility Fee”), (b) an amendment fee in the amount of $1,000 (the “Amendment Fee”), and (c) all out-of-pocket expenses.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement or the other Loan Documents is held to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, (a) the legality, validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents shall not be affected or impaired thereby and (b) the parties shall endeavor in good faith negotiations to replace the illegal, invalid or unenforceable provisions with valid provisions the economic effect of which comes as close as possible to that of the illegal, invalid or unenforceable provisions. The invalidity of a provision in a particular jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction. Without limiting the foregoing provisions of this Section 11.12 , if and to the extent that the enforceability of any provisions in this Agreement relating to Defaulting Lenders shall be limited by Debtor Relief Laws, as determined in good faith by the Administrative Agent and the applicable L/C Issuer, as applicable, then such provisions shall be deemed to be in effect only to the extent not so limited.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive shall be entitled to a vacation, in accordance with standard Company policies based on Corporate title and length of service, each year during the Term, which vacation presently shall be four (4) weeks and such vacation shall accrue at the rate of 13.33 hours for each month of service under this Agreement. Any vacation time not used may be accrued for use in future years, subject to a maximum accrual balance not to exceed 1 1/2 times annual accrual entitlement.

assistant: Vacations
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: is evidence of intentional and deliberate disregard of a provision in the Rule.” U.S. v. Gerber, 994 F.2d 1556, 1560 (11th Cir. 1993) (quoting U.S. v. Loyd, 721 F.2d 331, 333 (11th Cir. 1983) (per curiam)). First, the Rule 41 violation here was constitutional. True, as the Government points out, the Fourth Amendment does not impose a venue requirement; rather, it requires only that a warrant be (1) signed by a neutral, detached magistrate; (2) supported by probable cause; and (3) sufficiently particular. See Dalia v. U.S., 441 U.S. 238, 255, 99 S.Ct. 1682, 60 L.Ed.2d 177 (1979). But inherent in the notion of a “neutral, detached magistrate” is that the magistrate have authority to issue the warrant. See Shadswick v. City of Tampa, 407 U.S. 345, 352, 92 S.Ct. 2119, 32 L.Ed.2d 783 (1972) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added); U.S. v. Glover, 736 F.3d Options: A. holding that party that failed to object to instruction that jury not answer a question based on its answer to the prior question waived that partys right to have the jury make findings as to the subsequent question B. recognizing the inherent power of the courts to issue warrants C. holding in answer to the single question of whether power has been lawfully vested that municipal court clerks may issue warrants D. holding that a policy for purposes of municipal liability may be established by an officials single decision E. holding appellant could not obtain a new trial so that jury could answer liability question because the charge instructed the jury not to answer the question based on its answer to a prior question and because appellant did not object to this instruction

assistant: The best answer is C. holding in answer to the single question of whether power has been lawfully vested that municipal court clerks may issue warrants
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: Set forth on Schedule 5.21(b) , as of the Closing Date and as of the last date such Schedule was required to be updated in accordance with Sections 6.02 and/or 6.13, is a list of all registered or issued Intellectual Property (including all applications for registration and issuance) owned by each of the Loan Parties or that each of the Loan Parties has the right to (including the name/title, current owner, registration or application number, and registration or application date and such other information as reasonably requested by the Administrative Agent), provided that such Schedule delivered as of the Closing Date may be updated to correct or supplement information as agreed by the Borrower and the Administrative Agent.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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: policy owned by the debtor is not easily answered. This is especially so in the case of a D & O policy. Such policies typically provide direct protection to the corporation’s directors and officers. Indirect coverage is often afforded to the corporation for losses incurred indemnifying its principals. And some policies provide direct protection to the company (sometimes referred to as “entity coverage”) for certain kinds of claims, e.g., violations of securities law. Some cases have held that such proceeds are property of the estate either' because the debtor owns the policy, the debtor is a named insured under the policy, or because the estate would simply benefit from including the proceeds. See In re Sacred Heart Hospital of Norristown, 182 B.R. 418, 419-20 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1995) (<HOLDING>); In re Circle K Corp., 121 B.R. 257 Options: A. holding that existence of indemnity coverage notwithstanding that debtor had paid any such claims on behalf of principals operated nevertheless to bring proceeds into estate in order to avoid diminution of assets B. holding that where the policy includes indemnification coverage to the corporation proceeds are not property of the estate where there is no proof of payments by corporation of payments C. holding that existence of entity coverage was sufficient to bring proceeds into estate notwithstanding absence of claim against debtor corporation D. holding that because no claims had been filed against the debtor existence of entity coverage did not make proceeds property of the estate E. holding that entity coverage inapplicable because there were no remaining securities claims against the debtor

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that existence of entity coverage was sufficient to bring proceeds into estate notwithstanding absence of claim against debtor corporation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Loan Party will, and will cause each Subsidiary to, maintain with financially sound and reputable carriers having a financial strength rating of at least A- by A.M. Best Company (a) insurance in such amounts (with no greater risk retention) and against such risks (including loss or damage by fire and loss in transit; theft, burglary, pilferage, larceny, embezzlement, and other criminal activities; business interruption; and general liability) and such other hazards, as is customarily maintained by companies of established repute engaged in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations and (b) all insurance required pursuant to the Collateral Documents. The Borrower will furnish to the Lenders, upon request of the Administrative Agent, but no less frequently than annually, information in reasonable detail as to the insurance so maintained.

assistant: Insurances
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: presumably some type of informational pamphlet, as “a crew member and/or employee.” (D.E. No. 14, Am.Compl^ 29). Therefore, Plaintiffs allege that in addition to ship doctor, Dr. Coiner was recognized in other capacities aboard the Conquest. Based on such allegations, this Court is unwilling to conclude that there are no conceivable facts under which the Plaintiffs would be entitled to relief. Therefore, Carnival’s Motion to Dismiss as to Count IV is denied. C. Count V — Breach of Contract The general rule of admiralty law is that a ship’s passengers are not covered by the warranty of seaworthiness, a term that imposes absolute liability on a sea vessel for the carriage of cargo and seamen’s injuries. See Kornberg v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 741 F.2d 1332, 1335 (11th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>); Doe v. Celebrity Cruises, 145 F.Supp.2d 1337, Options: A. holding that passengers claims could not be based on unseaworthiness B. recognizing action for wrongful death based on unseaworthiness C. holding that claims based on grounds not objected to at trial cannot be considered on appeal D. holding that questioning of passengers on bus including asking for drivers licenses and tickets constituted consensual encounter and passengers were free to decline to answer questions E. holding that if random suspicionless questioning of bus passengers for inspection of identification and tickets was consensual encounter it was not a violation of passengers fourth amendment rights

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that passengers claims could not be based on unseaworthiness
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: helicopter was manufactured and delivered to the first purchaser on or before July 31, 1971, and that it has not modified the helicopter since delivery. Further, it is undisputed that Bell did not design, manufacture, sell, or install the engine or main fuel control unit that was in the helicopter at the time of the accident. Because the accident occurred on June 1, 2000, more than twenty-eight years had passed since delivery of the helicopter to the first purchaser. Thus, GARA precludes Plaintiffs from recovering against Bell under Texas state law for the following claims: (1) strict liability for defective design, manufacture, and marketing; (2) negligent design, testing, manufacture, and marketing; and (3) negligent failure to warn. See Alter, 944 F.Supp. at 536-41 (S.D.Tex.1996) (<HOLDING>); see also Altseimer v. Bell Helicopter Options: A. holding that convictions for both leaving the scene of an accident involving injury and leaving the scene of an accident involving property damage only were inconsistent and therefore could not be sustained B. holding that a complaint filed within three years of an accident complied with the michigan court rules and was not barred by the statute of limitations even though service was made more than three years after the accident C. holding a limitation on damages arising out of bodily injury to one person involved in an accident applies to all claims arising from the death of that person D. holding the plaintiffs could not establish a valid claim in a lawsuit involving a helicopter accident because gara prohibits texas state law claims arising from design or manufacturing defects in an aircraft delivered more than eighteen years before the accident E. holding texass substantive law should apply rather than the law of the state where the accident occurred because texas has a particularly strong interest when the defective product in question was manufactured and placed in the stream of commerce in texas

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the plaintiffs could not establish a valid claim in a lawsuit involving a helicopter accident because gara prohibits texas state law claims arising from design or manufacturing defects in an aircraft delivered more than eighteen years before the accident
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 correct error are proper only after the entry of final judgment; any such motion filed pri- or to the entry of final judgment must be viewed as a motion to reconsider. See Citizens Indus. Group v. Heartland Gas Pipeline, LLC, 856 N.E.2d 734, 737 (Ind. Ct.App.2006) (explaining that “a party can only file a motion to reconsider with the court if the action remains in fieri ” and “[i]f the trial court has issued a final judgment, the party must file a motion to correct errors rather than a motion to reconsider”), trans. denied; Stephens v. Irvin, 730 N.E.2d 1271, 1277 (Ind.Ct.App.2000) (treating a motion labeled a “Motion to Correct Error” filed before the entry of final judgment as a motion to reconsider), trans. denied; Hubbard v. Hubbard, 690 N.E.2d 1219, 1221 (Ind.Ct.App.1998) (<HOLDING>). This distinction is important because unlike Options: A. holding that a motion to reconsider a section 2255 ruling is available and that it is to be treated asa rule 59e motion if filed within 10 days of entry of the challenged order B. holding that rule 59e applies to a motion to reconsider C. holding that a motion to intervene filed after final judgment should have been granted D. holding that the courts denial of either a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment is not a final judgment and is not reviewable E. holding that a motion to reconsider filed after the entry of final judgment must be considered a motion to correct error

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a motion to reconsider filed after the entry of final judgment must be considered a motion to correct error