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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: value was outweighed by its prejudicial effect. Substantial deference is due a district court’s evidentiary rulings, see General Elec. Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136, 141, 118 S.Ct. 512, 139 L.Ed.2d 508 (1997), and Rule 404(b) decisions by the district court are discretionary and will not be overturned unless arbitrary and irrational, see United States v. Powers, 59 F.3d 1460, 1464 (4th Cir.1995). We conclude the district court correctly found that the evidence of the Davis’s other burglaries was relevant and necessary to prove motive, intent, and identification. We also conclude the evidence was reliable because the prior bad acts evidence consisted of undisputed scientific DNA evidence and facts to which Davis stipulated. See United States v. Bailey, 990 F.2d 119, 123 (4th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). Although Davis vehemently argues that the Options: A. holding that it is not B. holding that a jury could not be instructed that attempted murder can be committed knowingly C. holding new trial should not have been granted because jury was properly instructed D. holding improperly admitted testimony was cumulative to the other properly admitted evidence and was therefore harmless E. holding that rule 404b evidence should ordinarily be admitted as reliable unless it is so preposterous that it could not be believed by a rational and properly instructed juror

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that rule 404b evidence should ordinarily be admitted as reliable unless it is so preposterous that it could not be believed by a rational and properly instructed juror
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 U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 350 U.S. 495 76 S.Ct. 490 100 L.Ed. 639 John M. PETROWSKI, Grace Ringle, a minor, by Ervin Ringle, her guardian ad litem, Francis Gelhar, et al., Petitioners,v.HAWKEYE-SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY. No. 469. Argued March 7, 1956. Decided March 26, 1956. Mr. Richard P. Tinkham, Jr., Wausaw, Wis., for petitioner. Mr. Victor M. Harding, Milwaukee, Wis., for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 Respondent, Hawkeye-Security Insurance Company, filed a motion to quash the return of service of summons on the grounds that the District Court acquired no personal jurisdiction over it and that the power of attorney which it had filed with the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles of the State of Wisconsin did not authorize him to accept service of process for it in this case. After this motion was denied, respondent filed its answer to the complaint in which it again pressed its claim that the District Court lacked personal jurisdiction over it. Subsequently, however, respondent filed (1) a motion to amend its answer and to interplead; (2) a counterclaim; (3) a stipulation and order adding a party-plaintiff and amending the complaint and answer; and (4) a stipulation that judgment be entered against the alleged insured in favor of the additional party-plaintiff. The latter stipulation included the following provision, together with others consistent with it and confirmatory of its purpose: 2 '1. That each of the parties to this stipulation voluntarily submits to the jurisdiction of the above entitled Court without service of process herein, the same as if personal service had been obtained by each against the other.' 226 F.2d 135. 3 Following a trial on the merits, judgment was entered against respondent, but the Court of Appeals, with one judge dissenting, reversed on the ground that respondent's motion to quash should have been granted. 4 Upon examination of the record and the law, we conclude that the District Court had jurisdiction of the subject matter and that respondent, by its stipulation, waived any right to assert a lack of personal jurisdiction over it. We, therefore, reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case to it for further proceedings. 5 Reversed and remanded.

assistant: 9
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company has the requisite corporate power and authority and has taken all requisite corporate action necessary for, and no further action on the part of the Company, its officers, directors and stockholders is necessary for, (i) the authorization, execution and delivery of the Transaction Documents, (ii) the authorization of the performance of all obligations of the Company hereunder or thereunder, and (iii) the authorization, issuance (or reservation for issuance) and delivery of the Closing Securities and Common Warrant Shares. The Board has determined, at a duly convened meeting or pursuant to a unanimous written consent, that the issuance and sale of the Closing Securities, and the consummation of the transactions contemplated this Agreement and the other Transaction Documents (including, without limitation, the issuance of the Common Warrant Shares), are in the best interest of the Company.

assistant: Authorizations
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 Award of RSUs to Grantee and any obligation of the Company to issue Shares hereunder shall be subject to (a) all applicable federal, state, local and foreign laws, rules and regulations, and (b) any registration, qualification, approvals or other requirements imposed by any government or regulatory agency or body which the Company shall, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine to be necessary or applicable. Moreover, Shares shall not be issued hereunder if such issuance would be contrary to applicable law or the rules of any applicable stock exchange. Receipt of Shares under this Award shall be conditioned on Grantee’s compliance with procedures established from time to time by the Committee, including, but not limited to, submission of such forms and documents as the Committee may require in its sole and absolute discretion.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 384 U.S. 890 86 S.Ct. 1915 16 L.Ed.2d 996 Bruce BAINES et al.v.CITY OF DANVILLE, VIRGINIA. No. 959. Supreme Court of the United States June 20, 1966 Rehearing Denied Oct. 10, 1966. See 87 S.Ct. 12. Arthur Kinoy, William M. Kunstler and J. L. Williams, for petitioners. Rutledge C. Clement, for respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. PER CURIAM. 1 The motions to dispense with printing the petition for a writ of certiorari and the respondent's brief are granted. The petition for writ of certiorari is also granted and the judgments are affirmed. City of Greenwood v. Peacock, 384 U.S. 808, 86 S.Ct. 1800, 16 L.Ed.2d 944. 2 THE CHIEF JUSTICE, Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, Mr. Justice BRENNAN and Mr. Justice FORTAS would reverse the judgments for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice DOUGLAS in City of Greenwood v. Peacock, 384 U.S., at 835, 89 S.Ct., at 1816, 16 L.Ed.2d at 961.

assistant: 9
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: prosecutorial statements indicated racial motivation (Batson, 476 U.S. at 97, 90 L. Ed. 2d at 88, 106 S. Ct. at 1723); whether the level of black representation on the venire as compared to the jury indicated racial discrimination (Mahaffey, 128 Ill. 2d at 413); or whether the crimes with which defendant was charged were interracial (Evans, 125 Ill. 2d at 66). While the trial judge’s experience with local prosecutors and knowledge of local conditions are relevant factors in a prima facie case analysis, this court has never intimated that such considerations are dispositive of this issue. We find that the trial judge erred in failing to con sider all of the relevant factors in determining whether a prima facie case had been established. See People v. Holman (1989), 132 Ill. 2d 128, 173 (<HOLDING>). We thus conclude that the trial judge’s Options: A. holding the plaintiff satisfies the burden of a prima facie case by a preponderance of the evidence B. holding that because the plaintiff was not disabled for the purposes of the ada this court need not to address the other elements of the prima facie case C. holding district court did not abuse discretion in ruling moving party failed to make prima facie case to modify custody D. holding that the trial judge erred in not considering factors other than the number of black venirepersons excluded in ruling on the defendants prima facie case E. holding that a prima facie case is subject to independent review

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the trial judge erred in not considering factors other than the number of black venirepersons excluded in ruling on the defendants prima facie case
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 with respect to the material terms and conditions of the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents, the Company confirms that neither it nor any other Person acting on its behalf has provided any of the Purchasers or their agents or counsel with any information that it believes constitutes or might constitute material, nonpublic information. The Company understands and confirms that the Purchasers will rely on the foregoing representation in effecting transactions in securities of the Company. All disclosure furnished by or on behalf of the Company to the Purchasers regarding the Company, its business and the transactions contemplated hereby, including the Disclosure Schedules to this Agreement, is true and correct and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The press releases disseminated by the Company during the twelve months preceding the date of this Agreement taken as a whole do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made and when made, not misleading. The Company acknowledges and agrees that no Purchaser makes or has made any representations or warranties with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby other than those specifically set forth in Section 3.2 hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Grantor hereby irrevocably submits to the jurisdiction of any Texas state or federal court sitting in Houston, Texas in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Security Agreement or the other Credit Documents, and each Grantor hereby irrevocably agrees that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding may be heard and determined in such court. Each Credit Party hereby unconditionally and irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent it may effectively do so, any right it may have to the defense of an inconvenient forum to the maintenance of such action or proceeding. Each Grantor hereby agrees that service of copies of the summons and complaint and any other process which may be served in any such action or proceeding may be made by mailing or delivering a copy of such process to such Grantor at its address set forth in this supplement. Each Grantor hereby agrees that a final judgment in any such action or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law. Nothing in this Section shall affect the rights of any Lender to serve legal process in any other manner permitted by the law or affect the right of any Lender to bring any action or proceeding against any Grantor or its Property in the courts of any other jurisdiction.

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: Any notice to be provided hereunder to a party shall be in writing, and shall be deemed to have been provided three (3) Business Days after being sent as certified or registered mail in the United States mails, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or the next business day after having been deposited with a national courier service, or at the time of transmission if having been sent by email, provided that a copy shall also be sent by certified mail or delivery courier service, to the persons and addresses set forth below, as such address may be changed from time to time by notice to the other party. Notices to “Buyer” pursuant to the Agreement shall be provided to both Griffin Assignee and Subtenant Assignee.

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: entitled to exclude from the bankruptcy estate “any property that is exempt under ... State or local law.” Id. § (b)(2)(A). But “[f]or property to be exempt under state or local law, it must be claimed in the manner prescribed by those laws.” Morgan, 689 F.2d at 472. See also White v. Stump, 266 U.S. 810, 314, 45 S.Ct. 103, 69 L.Ed. 301 (1924). By failing to record his homestead deed in the place required by state law, the debtor in Morgan forfeited the right to claim the exemption in the . federal bankruptcy proceeding. The “manner prescribed” for claiming a homestead exemption is set out in Va.Code Ann. §§ 34-6, 34-14, 34-17. These sections establish the time allowed for setting apart the property, the place where the debtor must file the writing describing the propert (5th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the meaning of the procedural rules Options: A. holding that the bankruptcy code should not be understood to force bankruptcy courts to use statelaw procedures and statelaw actors to determine what portion of a debtors real property is an exempt homestead B. holding that the bankruptcy courts as compared to state courts have exclusive jurisdiction to determine issues of dischargeability under the bankruptcy code C. holding that the statelaw protecting employees from retaliatory discharge was independent from the cba because the statelaw claim could be resolved without interpreting the agreement itself D. holding that bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to control disposition of chapter 13 debtors property that is not property of the bankruptcy estate unless the property is related to the bankruptcy proceedings of the code E. recognizing inherent power of bankruptcy courts to equitably surcharge a debtors exemption to protect integrity of the bankruptcy process and to ensure that debtor does not exempt amount greater than allowed under bankruptcy code

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the bankruptcy code should not be understood to force bankruptcy courts to use statelaw procedures and statelaw actors to determine what portion of a debtors real property is an exempt homestead
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: Gilkey states "it is purely speculation to conclude that this third referral separately triggered an additional juvenile sentence of at least sixty days.” Appellant Reply Br. at 3. This claim raises factual questions which are not reviewable, even for plain error. See United States v. Ciapponi, 77 F.3d 1247, 1252 (10th Cir.), cert. denied., U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 1839, 134 L.Ed.2d 942 (1996). Furthermore, neither of the orders of custody in the first two adjudications contained specific terms, yet Gilkey concedes that the confinement which resulted therefrom qualified under § 4A1.2(d)(2)(A). Additionally, he cites circuit authority which this court finds applicable to the order of continued custody in the third adjudication. See United States v. Birch, 39 F.3d 1089, 1095 (10th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). 3 . The first two custody orders followed Options: A. holding individual defendants are not an employer within meaning of title vii B. holding juveniles statement inadmissible when after being placed in custody police took juvenile to police station and held juvenile in area where adult suspects were held instead of taking juvenile to a juvenile processing office or any of the places listed as an alternative in section 5202 and placing juvenile in specifically designated office for juveniles C. holding defendants placement into kansas juvenile custody qualified as confinement within meaning of ussg 4a12d2a D. holding that although police initially took juvenile into custody juvenile arrested on drug charge did not have standing to challenge constitutionality of pretrial detention statute in relation to his drug case where juvenile was never detained for drug offense E. holding that chapter 39 provides the juvenile judge the flexibility to factor a childs safety into a custody decision at all stages of a juvenile proceeding

assistant: The best answer is C. holding defendants placement into kansas juvenile custody qualified as confinement within meaning of ussg 4a12d2a
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 set forth herein, the Parent Borrower, the Dutch Parent Borrower and , the Vion Dutch Subsidiary Borrowers and the German Subsidiary Borrower may request the issuance of Letters of Credit denominated in dollars or Alternative Currencies for such Borrower’s own account (or the account of any of its Subsidiaries) and the Canadian Borrower may request the issuance of Letters of Credit denominated in Canadian Dollars for its own account (or the account of any of its Subsidiaries), in a form reasonably acceptable to the Administrative Agent and the Issuing Bank, at any time and from time to time during the Revolving Availability Period. In the event of any inconsistency between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the terms and conditions of any form of letter of credit application or other agreement submitted by the applicable Borrower to, or entered into by the applicable Borrower with, the Issuing Bank relating to any Letter of Credit, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: by linking to a third-party website or mobile application , we do not endorse or sponsor its content , confirm its accuracy , credibility , authenticity , reliability , validity , integrity or legality .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: L.Ed.2d 876 (1989) (quoting Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782, 801, 102 S.Ct. 3368, 3378, 73 L.Ed.2d 1140 (1982) (alteration in original)). The Eighth Amendment provides a capital defendant the broadest latitude to offer evidence at sentencing to avoid the death penalty. The general rule is that the jury must consider any mitigating evidence, that is, “any aspect of a defendant’s character or record or any of the circumstances of the offense that the defendant proffers as a basis for a sentence less than death.” Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586, 604, 98 S.Ct. 2954, 2965, 57 L.Ed.2d 973 (1978) (plurality opinion). The only question here, as the majority acknowledges, is whether any reasonable juror could have found the redacted portion of the confession to be mitigating. See ante at 419-20 (<HOLDING>). Howard’s effort to offer his full confession Options: A. holding introduction of actually coerced confession constitutes reversible error even where confession was cumulative in nature B. holding that summary judgment was appropriate when no reasonable factfinder could have found for the nonmovant C. holding that corpus delicti rule is satisfied if some evidence exists outside of extrajudicial confession which considered alone or in connection with confession shows that crime actually occurred D. holding that a petitioner is entitled to habeas corpus relief if it is found that upon the record evidence adduced at the trial no rational trier of fact could have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt E. holding that we are firmly convinced that no reasonable juror could have found that the unredacted portions of howards confession were evidence that weldon rather than howard actually killed le

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that we are firmly convinced that no reasonable juror could have found that the unredacted portions of howards confession were evidence that weldon rather than howard actually killed le
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: defendant appeals. II, ANALYSIS T 6 Defendant makes three arguments: (1) he was entitled to a full restitution hearing; (2) the trial court failed to make adequate findings pursuant to the statutory factors when it ordered restitution; and (8) there was plain error in the manner in which restitution was ordered. ¶ 7 An appellate court will not disturb a trial court's restitution order "unless it exceeds that prescribed by law or otherwise abused its discretion." State v. Schweitzer, 943 P.2d 649, 653 (Utah Ct.App.1997). within the discretion of the trial court to impose sentence, which may include a fine, restitution, probation or imprisonment. See Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-201(2) & (4) (1999); State v. Snyder, 747 P.2d 417, 420 (Utah 1987). "However, upon conviction of a crime wh pp.1994) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 12 However, these cases are all Options: A. holding trial court acted on the merits of motion and thus de facto considered it timely B. holding that if a motion implicates the merits of a cause of action the district court should find jurisdiction exists and treat the objection as a direct attack on the merits of the plaintiffs case C. recognizing that sanctions are collateral to the merits of the case and may be considered even after the merits are no longer before the district court D. holding that only claims properly presented to the bia and considered on their merits can be reviewed by this court E. holding that an issue not presented to the trial court will not be considered on appeal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding trial court acted on the merits of motion and thus de facto considered it 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: claims are based on the document.” Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. White, 998 F.2d 1192, 1196 (3d Cir.1993). That proposition does not bring Hankin close to showing res judicata on the face of the Brodys’ complaint, however. The Brodys’ complaint mentions two documents unearthed in arbitration: copies of the alleged 1991 amendments to the HanMar agreements (along with related management and leasing agreements, and maintenance agreements), and a statement by HanMar’s counsel, presumably contained in a letter or deposition transcript, that no letters to a limited partner referring to the 1991 amendments could be found. The District Court thus properly could have considered these documents under White. See In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. Litig., 114 F.3d 1410, 1426 (3d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). The District Court exceeded its mandate, Options: A. holding that rule was not violated where officer stated he made a report but was unable to find it because there was no report to tender to counsel B. holding that the defendants prior conviction referenced in his presentence report could be taken as admitted because he had made no objection to the facts in his report C. holding that district court properly considered a police report that the defendant had stipulated contained a factual basis for his plea D. holding no jurisdiction where appellant argued report was no report because it failed to mention appellant in any substantive way but trial court found report was merely deficient on element of causation as to appellant and granted extension E. holding that the district court permissibly considered annual report where data contained in the annual report repeatedly was referenced in complaint but was not cited

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district court permissibly considered annual report where data contained in the annual report repeatedly was referenced in complaint but was not cited
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries owns, or has a valid license to use, all Intellectual Property necessary for the conduct of its business as currently conducted free and clear of all Liens, except where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. To the Borrower’s knowledge, no holding, injunction, decision or judgment has been rendered by any Governmental Authority and neither the Borrower nor any of its Restricted Subsidiaries has entered into any settlement stipulation or other agreement (except license agreements in the ordinary course of business) which would limit, cancel or question the validity of the Borrower’s or any Restricted Subsidiary’s rights in, any Intellectual Property in any respect that would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. To the Borrower’s knowledge, no claim has been asserted or threatened or is pending by any Person challenging or questioning the use by the Borrower or its Restricted Subsidiaries of any Intellectual Property or the validity or effectiveness of any Intellectual Property, except as would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. The use of Intellectual Property by the Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries does not infringe on the rights of any Person in a manner that would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. The Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries take all reasonable actions that in the exercise of their reasonable business judgment should be taken to protect their Intellectual Property, including Intellectual Property that is confidential in nature, except where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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: attorneys’ fees can accrue after the filing of a suit, while punitive damages do not — is meaningful. Once post-filing of suit tender of compensatory damages is accomplished, attorneys’ fees can accrue continuously until the matter is fully resolved, thus presenting a cognizable harm sufficient to prevent a case from having been rendered moot by post-suit tender of compensatory damages, unlike punitive damages. See, e.g., Bates, 271 Ill.Dec. 402, 785 N.E.2d at 62 (“Defendant failed to tender the attorney fees recoverable under section 10a(c) of the Consumer Fraud Act, and thus, failed to tender the ‘full amount’ owed to plaintiff.”). Punitive damages, thus, should not be available as a matter of law as a result of the pre-tria 3d 1075, 248 Ill.Dec. 721, 734 N.E.2d 1012, 1015 (2000) (<HOLDING>); DeCoteau v. Nodak Mutual Insurance Company, Options: A. recognizing a narrow class of cases in which the termination of the class representatives claim for relief does not moot the claims of the class members B. holding that because the record in the case had not been developed sufficiently to determine whether a childs statement was admissible under the tender years exception a new trial was warranted C. holding that the dismissal of a class action suit after the representative plaintiffs claims became moot was proper noting that because the class action was never properly certified nor the class properly identified by the district court the decision that the claims of the purported representative were moot dictated the dismissal of the uncertified class action as well quoting bd of school commrs v jacobs 420 us 128 130 95 sct 848 850 43 led2d 74 78 1975 per curiam D. holding that because no class was certified at the time tender rendered moot haymans claims dismissal of the entire suit was warranted E. holding that because no class was certified at the time the individual claims were dismissed the class action was properly dismissed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that because no class was certified at the time tender rendered moot haymans claims dismissal of the entire suit was warranted
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 captions and headings of this Agreement are included for ease of reference only and will be disregarded in interpreting or construing this Agreement. All references herein to Sections will refer to Sections of this Agreement.

assistant: Headings
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: according to their original contract terms, while the debtor’s actual plan may propose to surrender the collateral or (if permitted) to bifurcate an under-secured claim into secured and unsecured components or rea-mortize the debt at a reduced interest rate. Courts have reacted to these distortions in a number of ways. Some have simply applied the means test calculation regardless of result on the ground that Congress must have intended what it clearly said. See, e.g., In re Barr, 341 B.R. 181 (Bankr.M.D.N.C.2006); In re Alexander, 344 B.R. 742 (Bankr.E.D.N.C.2006). Others have articulated various circumstances under which they would depart from the calculation when it leads to a result that they believe was not what Congress envisioned. In re Edmunds, 350 B.R. 636 (Bankr. D.S.C.2006) (<HOLDING>); Beskin v. McPherson (In re McPherson), 350 Options: A. holding that projected disposable income for abovemedian income debt or is not fixed by means test calculation that includes expenses that would not actually be incurred under plan such as car payments for car to be surrendered B. holding that for abovemedian income debtors projected disposable income calculated on form b22c is the starting point but not the ending point in determining debtors correct minimum obligation and both income and expenses must be determined as of date of confirmation C. holding that projected disposable income for abovemedian debtors is disposable income as defined by 1325b D. holding that a debtors disposable income as calculated under 11 usc 1325b2 is not the same as a debtors projected disposable income but that it can be used as the presumptive projected disposable income E. holding that projected disposable income for an abovemedian income debtor would not include a deduction for contractual payments on undersecured debt that the debtor would not actually be required to pay because the plan bifurcated the claim or surrendered the collateral

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that projected disposable income for abovemedian income debt or is not fixed by means test calculation that includes expenses that would not actually be incurred under plan such as car payments for car to be surrendered
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: 770) (2006) (declaratory judgment could not be used to compel ex-husband to provide additional funds to ex-wife). The trial court erred by dismissing Appellants’ request for declaratory judgment on the basis that it impermissibly asked the trial court to interpret a criminal statute and that it imprope injunctive relief — enjoining the arrest or prosecution of Appellants — squarely implicates the administration of criminal law and, thus, is improper. See Mohwish v. Franklin, 291 Ga. 179, 179-180 (728 SE2d 240) (2012) (injunction not available where sought to interfere with an ongoing prosecution); Holmes v. Bd. of Commrs., 271 Ga. 206 (517 SE2d 788) (1999) (injunction not available to restrain trespass prosecution); City of East Point v. Minton, 207 Ga. 495, 499 (62 SE2d 911) (1951) (<HOLDING>). Decided May 9, 2016. John R. Monroe, for Options: A. recognizing that a criminal prosecution is not complete until a sentence has been imposed B. holding that malicious prosecution claim accrues when underlying prosecution is terminated C. holding that a 1983 due process claim that essentially contests the fairness of the plaintiffs prosecution is similar to his malicious prosecution claim and claims resembling malicious prosecution do not accrue until the prosecution has terminated in the plaintiffs favor D. recognizing that ejquity will not enjoin a criminal prosecution solely to prevent such a prosecution E. holding that foreign states prosecution did not bar subsequent florida prosecution for same conduct

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that ejquity will not enjoin a criminal prosecution solely to prevent such a prosecution
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: muddy the decree. Rangen, Inc., 159 Idaho at 808, 367 P.3d at 203 (noting that adopting a perspective that would render a “partial decree less, rather than more, clear” is disfavored). Second, an adjudicated water right is a judicially decreed property right. Clear Springs Foods, Inc. v. Spackman, 150 Idaho 790, 797, 252 P.3d 71, 78 (2011) (“When one has legally acquired a water right, he has a property right....” (quoting Bennett v. Twin Falls North Side Land & Water Co., 27 Idaho 643, 651, 150 P. 336, 339 (1915))). It is binding on the IDWR, indeed the Director has a “ ‘clear legal duty’ to distribute water” according to decreed water rights. In re SRBA, 157 Idaho 385, 393, 336 P.3d 792, 800 (2014); see also Musser v. Higginson, 125 Idaho 392, 395-96, 871 P.2d 809, 812-13 (1994) (<HOLDING>), abrogated on other grounds by Rincover v. Options: A. recognizing the right to use water to generate power B. holding substantial completion had occurred because water district took possession of all the lines filled them with water and began using them to serve the customers of the water district C. holding that article x 2 of the california constitution dictates the basic principles defining water rights that no one can have a protectible interest in the unreasonable use of water and that holders of water rights must use water reasonably and beneficially D. holding that mandamus was appropriate to require the director to deliver the full decreed water rights of a water right holder E. recognizing that water rights constitute a real property interest

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that mandamus was appropriate to require the director to deliver the full decreed water rights of a water right holder
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: 6. In addition, each party agrees that it will not (and direct its employees and representatives not to) disclose (i) to any person either the fact that discussions or negotiations are taking place concerning one or more possible transactions between the parties or (ii) any of the terms, conditions or other facts with respect to any such possible transactions, including the status thereof.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: before he was actually on post-release supervision. ¶ 10. Additionally, the circuit court has no authority over Jones while he is in the ISP. The ISP is an alternative custodial classification; an offender in the ISP is serving time “confined as a prisoner under the jurisdiction of the [MDOC] in the normally-understood [sic] sense of that term.” Lewis v. State, 761 So.2d 922, 923 (¶ 5) (Miss.Ct.App.2000). “In other words, an offender in the ISP is an inmate in the custody of the MDOC who is serving time on house arrest instead of being housed in a MDOC facility.” Ivory, 999 So.2d at 426 (¶ 15). An offender in the ISP is “under the full and complete jurisdiction of the [MDOC].” Miss.Code Ann. § 47-5-1008(3) (Rev.2011); See also Babbitt v. State, 755 So.2d 406, 409 (¶ 14) (Miss.2000) (<HOLDING>). The circuit court could not sentence Jones as Options: A. holding the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal where the circuit court had the power to remand the agency decision for further proceedings B. holding that rule 32 petition should have been granted where defendant was convicted in circuit court on indictment entered while case was on appeal from transfer order because circuit court lacked jurisdiction where we remanded the case to the juvenile court for further proceedings C. holding a circuit court lacked jurisdiction to reinstate an offenders sentence for a violation of the isp that occurred while the offender was in the isp D. holding that when the district court improperly purported to transfer to the circuit court an action over which the circuit court lacked subjectmatter jurisdiction the circuit court was without jurisdiction to enter its judgment which was void and dismissing the appeal from that void judgment E. holding that when the district court dismissed rather than transferred a case not within its jurisdiction and a party appealed that dismissal the circuit court could consider only the propriety of the dismissal on appeal and determining that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction on appeal to consider the merits of the action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a circuit court lacked jurisdiction to reinstate an offenders sentence for a violation of the isp that occurred while the offender was in the isp
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: Employee shall be paid an annualized Base Salary, payable in accordance with the regular payroll practices of the Company, of not less than $400,000, with increases, if any, as may be approved in writing by the Compensation Committee.

assistant: Base Salary
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 Bill of Sale shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Delaware without giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision or rule (whether of the State of Delaware or any other jurisdiction).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement may also be executed via facsimile, which shall be deemed an original.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: MBNA cites Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. R.F. Lafferty & Co., Inc., supra. The Trustee contends that the aforementioned case is distinguishable from the instant case because the claim at issue here is one for contribution. In his claim in the Amended Complaint, the Trustee alleges that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has sued CPSI for alleged violations of consumer laws, that MBNA was an active participant in and encouraged CPCI’s business practices and that, to the extent CPSI is held liable for consumer violations, that MBNA should be held jointly liable as a joint tort-feasor. Amended Complaint ¶¶ 99-107 (emphasis added). Under the common law of Delaware, no right to contribution existed among tortfeasors. Lutz v. Boltz, 48 Del. 197, 199, 100 A.2d 647, 647 (1953) (<HOLDING>). Under the common law of Pennsylvania, Options: A. recognizing that statutory provision for contribution was enacted to relieve the rigor of the common law and allow enforced contribution among joint tortfeasors who are in pari delicto as to each other and thereby place the burden equally upon all solvent tortfeasors B. recognizing a right to contribution C. recognizing contribution in the appropriate case D. recognizing that prior to 1949 when the statute permitting contribution among joint tortfeasors was enacted no right of contribution existed between jointtortfeasors in delaware E. holding that contribution will lie where no statute precludes recovery from the joint tortfeasor against whom contribution is sought

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that prior to 1949 when the statute permitting contribution among joint tortfeasors was enacted no right of contribution existed between jointtortfeasors in delaware
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’s minimum base salary during the Term shall be at the rate of $280,000 per year (the “Base Salary”). Base Salary shall be payable in substantially equal installments in accordance with the Company’s payroll practices as in effect from time to time, less any amounts required to be withheld under applicable law. The Base Salary will be subject to adjustment from time to time in the sole discretion of the Board; provided that, the Company covenants that it shall not reduce the Base Salary below $280,000 or the Base Salary then in effect immediately prior to the reduction unless (i) Executive consents to such reduction, or (ii) the reduction is in connection with a general reduction of not more than 20% in compensation of senior executives of the Company generally that occurs prior to the effective date of any Corporate Change.

assistant: Base Salary
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 arbitrator is appointed, no new or different claim may be submitted except with the consent of the arbitrator and all other parties.” The Court has held also that an arbitrator acts in an excess of his or her authority under the third point of narrow certiorari review if in fashioning a remedy the arbitrator mandates that an illegal act be carried out or grants an award that addresses issues beyond the scope of the collective bargaining agreement or that extends beyond the terms and conditions of the employment. Township of Ridley v. Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 27, 718 A.2d 872 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1998); Town of McCandless v. McCandless Police Officers Ass’n, 677 A.2d 879 (Pa. Cmwlth.1996). See also Appeal of Upper Providence Police Delaware County, 514 Pa. 501, 526 A.2d 315 (1987) (<HOLDING>); Washington Arbitration Case, 436 Pa. 168, 269 Options: A. holding that arbitrators award will be vacated if mistaken as to applicable law B. holding that an award may be in excess of the arbitrators powers if it requires the public employer to perform an act that is prohibited by law or if it does not involve legitimate terms and conditions of employment C. holding that an award of arbitration cannot be set aside for mere errors of judgment either as to the law or the facts if the award is within the scope of the submission and the arbitrators are not guilty of the acts of misconduct set forth in the statute the award operates as a final and conclusive judgment and however disappointing it may be the parties must abide by it D. holding that it may not E. holding that a court reviewing an arbitrators award in an act 111 grievance arbitration involves questions regarding 1 the jurisdiction of the arbitrator 2 the regularity of the proceedings 3 an excess of the arbitrators powers and 4 deprivation of constitutional rights

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an award may be in excess of the arbitrators powers if it requires the public employer to perform an act that is prohibited by law or if it does not involve legitimate terms and conditions of employment