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: of such an interest without due process of law.” Zinermon v. Burch, 494 U.S. 113, 125, 110 S.Ct. 975, 108 L.Ed.2d 100 (1990). “The fundamental requirement of due process is the opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.” Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333, 96 S.Ct. 893, 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976) (internal quotation marks omitted). That opportunity sometimes may occur after the deprivation of liberty or property. See id. at 342-43, 96 S.Ct: 893 (approving a system in which the Social Security Administration may terminate disability payments without a prior hearing, so long as it provides the recipient with a post-termination opportunity to contest the decision); see also City of Los Angeles v. David, 538 U.S. 715, 718, 123 S.Ct. 1895, 155 L.Ed.2d 946 (2003) (<HOLDING>); Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 682, 97 Options: A. holding that a hearing is not required within 48 hours of when a city imposes a parking fine B. holding that 72 hours actual notice before a hearing is required it is not sufficient to make court calendars available to all the sureties in the county C. holding that a hearing is not required before a junior high school imposes corporal punishment on a student D. holding that citys enforcement of the entire state penal code would not constitute a city policy because the city was required to follow state law E. holding that city attorneys promise in an oral settlement agreement for city to annex and rezone land was within the legal authority of the city of joliet to accomplish and were not absolutely void acts per se therefore city could be estopped from avoiding enforcement of contract

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a hearing is not required within 48 hours of when a city imposes a parking fine
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: Askia S. Ashanti appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to exhaust administrative remedies his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging grooming policies enforced at various California prisons violated his First Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s determination that a prisoner failed to exhaust available administrative remedies, and review for clear error its findings of fact. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed the action without prejudice to refiling because Ashanti failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing his original complaint. See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1200 (9th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Ashanti’s remaining contentions are Options: A. holding that dismissal under 42 usc 1997ea was required even though case had gone to trial as inmate had failed to exhaust administrative remedies B. holding that 42 usc 1997ea requires prisoners to exhaust a process and not a remedy C. holding that the prisoner has the burden of demonstrating he has exhausted his administrative remedies in his complaint D. holding that administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to filing a claim in court E. holding that 42 usc 1997ea requires dismissal without prejudice where a prisoner has not exhausted administrative remedies prior to filing suit

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that 42 usc 1997ea requires dismissal without prejudice where a prisoner has not exhausted administrative remedies prior to filing suit
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: (i) There is no action, suit, proceeding or investigation pending or, to the best knowledge of the Borrower, threatened, against the Borrower before any Governmental Authority and (ii) the Borrower is not subject to any order, judgment, decree, injunction, stipulation or consent order of or with any Governmental Authority that, in the case of either of the foregoing clauses (i) and (ii) , (A) asserts the invalidity of this Agreement or any other Transaction Document, (B) seeks to prevent the grant of a security interest in any Collateral by the Borrower to the Administrative Agent, the ownership or acquisition by the Borrower of any Pool Receivable or other Collateral or the consummation of any of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement or any other Transaction Document, (C) seeks any determination or ruling that could materially and adversely affect the performance by the Borrower of its obligations under, or the validity or enforceability of, this Agreement or any other Transaction Document or (D) individually or in the aggregate for all such actions, suits, proceedings and investigations could reasonably be expected to have a Borrower Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Litigations
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: does not cause harm. Implicit in the Negligence Complaint, therefore, must be an allegation that the lead paint somehow separated from the wall or ceiling, and entered the air, or fell on the floor, furniture or fixtures in the apartment. One possibility is that lead dust flaked off the walls and was inhaled by Ashley Allman. Another is that the lead paint chipped, and that Ashley Allman ingested those chips. Although flaking, peeling, chipping, crumbling and falling are not among the listed methods of disseminating pollution, it is arguable, and several courts have found, that the presence of lead dust or chips in an apartment qualifies as “discharge,” “dispersal,” or even more generally, as “release.” See, e.g., Oates by Oates v. State, 157 Misc.2d 618, 597 N.Y.S.2d 550 (Ct.Cl.1993) (<HOLDING>), appeal withdrawn after settlement, 206 A.D.2d Options: A. holding that the discharge of paint chips into soil was covered by the pollution exclusion because it polluted the environment but that the presence of lead paint in a household would not be so covered B. holding that pollution exclusion did not apply to claim arising from ingestion of lead paint because exclusion reasonably may be limited to environmental claims C. holding lead paint poisoning covered by the pollution exclusion D. holding extraneous offenses of murder by cyanide poisoning relevant to charge of murder by chloroform poisoning E. holding that the release of carbon monoxide into an apartment is not the type of environmental pollution contemplated by the pollution exclusion clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding lead paint poisoning covered by the pollution exclusion
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: post any information that is abusive , threatening , obscene , defamatory , libelous , or racially , sexually , religiously , or otherwise objectionable or offensive or engage in ongoing toxic behavior , such as by repeatedly posting information on an unsolicited basis .

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: 831 P.2d 1197] (“Any negligence during delivery which causes injury to the fetus and resultant emotional anguish to the mother, therefore, breaches a duty owed directly to the mother”), Zavala also argued she had properly pleaded a “direct victim” claim for emotional distress damages. C. The Court’s Summary Judgment Ruling in Favor of Dr. Arce On September 30, 1994, the court issued a telephonic ruling granting Dr. Arce’s motion for summary judgment. The ruling, however, was silent with respect to Zavala’s claim for “direct victim” emotional distress damages. The court construed the first cause of action for medical malpractice to be a wrongful death claim which was barred as a matter of law by the California Supreme Court’s decision in Justus v. Atchison, supra, 19 Cal.3d at page 580 (<HOLDING>). On October 14, 1994, the court entertained Options: A. holding a wrongful death action may not be maintained for the death of an unborn child B. holding that action for wrongful death may generally not be maintained where death was selfinflicted C. holding that a failure to include a beneficiary in a wrongful death action is a defect because the wrongful death act restricts plaintiffs to a single action D. holding that plaintiffs failure to prove decedents death was caused by the wrongful acts of the defendant precludes any recovery of wrongful death damages under mississippis wrongful death statute E. recognizing cause of action for wrongful death

assistant: The best answer is A. holding a wrongful death action may not be maintained for the death of an unborn child
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: if you reject our last written settlement offer made before the arbitrator was appointed , your dispute goes all the way to an arbitrator 's decision ( called an `` award '' ) , and the arbitrator awards you more than this last written offer , we will : ( i ) pay the greater of the award or $ 1,000 ; ( ii ) pay your reasonable attorney 's fees , if any ; and ( iii ) reimburse any expenses ( including expert witness fees and costs ) that your attorney reasonably accrues for investigating , preparing , and pursuing your claim in arbitration .

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: The US Revolving Borrowers hereby agree to protect, indemnify, pay and save harmless each Issuing Lender and any of its Affiliates that has issued a Letter of Credit from and against any and all claims, demands, liabilities, damages, taxes, penalties, interest, judgments, losses, costs, charges and expenses (including reasonable fees, expenses and disbursements of counsel and allocated costs of internal counsel) which the Issuing Lender or any of its Affiliates may incur or be subject to as a consequence, direct or indirect, of the issuance of any Letter of Credit, other than as a result of (A) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Issuing Lender as determined by a final non-appealable judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction or (B) the wrongful dishonor by the Issuing Lender or any of Issuing Lender’s Affiliates of a proper demand for payment made under any Letter of Credit, except if such dishonor resulted from any act or omission, whether rightful or wrongful, of any present or future de jure or de facto government or Official Body.

assistant: Indemnity
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: with an insured vehicle is an issue of first impression for our Court, but our courts of appeals have decided a number of cases establishing some guiding principles. In Latham v. Mountain States Mutual Casualty Co., for example, the court held that when an unknown vehicle strikes another vehicle, which in turn strikes the insured, the requirements of the section are met and coverage is afforded. 482 S.W.2d 655, 657 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1972, writ ref d n.r.e.). However, collisions with cargo that has fallen from an unidentified vehicle or with debris in the roadway have been held not to constitute “actual physical contact” with a “motor vehicle.” Deville, 988 S.W.2d at 333; Williams, 849 S.W.2d at 861; Smith, 2003 WL 21391534, at *3, 2003 Tex.App. LEXIS 5056, at *7 (<HOLDING>). Thus, our courts of appeals have reasonably Options: A. holding that water pump falling from truck and striking insured was not actual physical contact with a motor vehicle B. holding that collision between the claimants vehicle and a steel pipe dropped from an exiting truck was not actual physical contact with a motor vehicle C. holding that a collision with the loading ramp of a trailer was not actual physical contact with a motor vehicle D. holding that a trailer is not a dangerous instrumentality notwithstanding the fact that it meets the statutory definition of a motor vehicle E. holding that the sensible and popular understanding of what a motor vehicle accident entails necessarily involves the motor vehicle being operated as a motor vehicle

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a collision with the loading ramp of a trailer was not actual physical contact with a motor vehicle
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: case did not satisfy this standard. Because the credibility of a witness who testifies to substantive facts is a material issue at trial, evidence impeaching the witness’s credibility cannot be deemed “immaterial.” United States v. White, 972 F.2d 16, 20 (2d Cir.1992). Nevertheless, such evidence is not necessarily material to the jury’s verdict when it is cumulative of other impeachment evidence known to the jury. See id. at 21; see also United States v. Avellino, 136 F.3d 249, 258 (2d Cir.1998). That is the case here. Insofar as the newly discovered evidence revealed that Shapovalov had engaged in fraudulent activity beyond what he acknowledged at trial, the criminal conduct was sufficiently similar to be cumulative. See, e.g., United States v. Orena, 32 F.3d 704, 717 (2d Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). To the extent the new evidence also indicated Options: A. holding that witnesss undisclosed criminal activity did not warrant new trial where jury heard evidence of other similar crimes B. holding in a criminal context that the probative value of evidence of other crimes is not substantially outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice where the court will give a limiting jury charge C. holding evidence of other crimes inadmissible when identity is not at issue D. holding that new evidence impeaching credibility of governments key witness was cumulative of other evidence of witness criminal activity E. holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting highly probative and relevant evidence of other crimes

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that witnesss undisclosed criminal activity did not warrant new trial where jury heard evidence of other similar crimes
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: the company does not warrant , endorse , guarantee or responsible for any third party , including without limitation advertisers , other users of the service and parties who offer services through the service .

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: v. INS, 192 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.1999), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA correctly dismissed Contreras-Pabon’s appeal because his vague testimony regarding threats he received failed to demonstrate he was at risk of harm. See Sebastian-Sebastian v. INS, 195 F.3d 504, 507 (9th Cir.1999). Accordingly, Contreras-Pabon failed to establish eligibility for asylum and therefore failed to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of deportation. See de Leon-Barrios v. INS, 116 F.3d 391, 394 (9th Cir.1997). Contreras-Pabon’s contention that his due process rights were violated lacks merit because Contreras-Pabon was represented by counsel and was afforded a full and fair opportunity to present testimony and evidence. See Cuadras v. INS, 910 F.2d 567, 573 (9th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. *** This Options: A. holding that petitioner did not exhaust his due process claim that he was denied a full and fair hearing by arguing that due process was violated on the ground that the ij admitted uncertified evidence B. holding that to establish a violation of due process an alien must show that she was denied a full and fair opportunity to present her claims internal quotation marks omitted C. holding that there is no due process violation where the ijs finding was not arbitrary and the alien was not denied a full and fair opportunity to present his claims D. holding that an alien is entitled to the fifth amendment guarantee of due process which is satisfied by a full and fair hearing E. holding that alien need not receive actual notice for due process requirements to be satisfied

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an alien is entitled to the fifth amendment guarantee of due process which is satisfied by a full and fair hearing
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: with the Florida Supreme Court's statement on this matter. "While a settlement agreement with, and release of, a defendant's insurance company may reflect a victim's willingness to accept the amount paid in full satisfaction for all civil liability, it does not reflect the willingness of the People to accept that sum in satisfaction of the defendant's rehabilitative and deterrent debt to society. A restitution order pursuant to a defendant's plea is an agreement between the defendant and the state. The victim is not party to the agreement, and a release by the victim cannot act to release a defendant from his financial debt to the state any more than it could terminate his prison sentence." Kirby v. State, 863 So.2d 238, 243 (Fla.2008) (quoting People v. Bernal, 101 Cal.Ap pp.1987) (<HOLDING>); Urias v. State, 987 S.W.2d 613, 614 Options: A. holding that the dismissal of a civil action in state court does not preclude a restitution order on the same claim B. holding that because the state was not a party to a settlement agreement a civil release of claims does not and cannot specifically preclude courtordered restitution in a criminal case C. holding that when in light of the circumstances of a particular case the court sets a reasonable deadline by which victims must present their restitution claims and supporting evidence any victim who fails to comply is barred from recovery D. holding that even though the victim has settled a civil claim and signed a release the state is not barred from seeking or the court from imposing reasonable restitution E. holding that equitable restitution is available but that legal restitution is not

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that even though the victim has settled a civil claim and signed a release the state is not barred from seeking or the court from imposing reasonable restitution
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No waiver by any party of any breach of any terms or conditions contained herein shall be construed as a waiver of any other breach of the same or other terms or conditions herein. No delay or failure by any party in enforcing against the other any term or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed a waiver of any right under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH OF THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT ANY CONTROVERSY THAT MAY ARISE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IS LIKELY TO INVOLVE COMPLICATED AND DIFFICULT ISSUES, AND THEREFORE EACH SUCH PARTY HEREBY IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ANY RIGHT SUCH PARTY MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY PROCEEDING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT AND THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY, IN EACH CASE, WHETHER NOW EXISTING OR HEREAFTER ARISING, AND WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, EQUITY OR OTHERWISE. EACH OF THE PARTIES AGREES AND CONSENTS THAT ANY SUCH PROCEEDING SHALL BE DECIDED BY COURT TRIAL WITHOUT A JURY AND THAT EACH OF THE PARTIES MAY FILE AN ORIGINAL COUNTERPART OF A COPY OF THIS AGREEMENT WITH ANY COURT AS WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF THE CONSENT OF EACH OF THE PARTIES TO THE WAIVER OF EACH RESPECTIVE PARTY’S RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY. EACH OF THE PARTIES CERTIFIES AND ACKNOWLEDGES THAT (A) NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PARTY HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PARTY WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER; (B) EACH OF THE PARTIES UNDERSTANDS AND HAS CONSIDERED THE IMPLICATION OF THIS WAIVER; (C) EACH OF THE PARTIES MAKES THIS WAIVER VOLUNTARILY; AND (D) EACH OF THE PARTIES HAS BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION 5(h)(iii) .

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: convinces us that the district court fully complied with the mandates of Rule 11 in accepting Mayfield’s guilty plea and ensured that Mayfield entered his plea knowingly and voluntarily and that the plea was supported by an independent factual basis. See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116, 119-20 (4th Cir.1991). Counsel also questions whether the district court erred by imposing a mandatory term of life imprisonment under § 841(b)(1)(A). Because Mayfield did not object in the district court on this ground, our review is for plain error. See United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540, 547-48, 555 (4th Cir.2005) (discussing standard). We find no error in the district court’s imposition of the mandatory life sentence. See United States v. Burgess, 478 F.3d 658, 660-62 (4th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed Options: A. holding that harp foreclosed any claim that north carolina conviction for felony pos session of cocaine did not qualify as a felony drug offense for purposes of applying the enhanced penalty under 841b B. holding lopez was inapplicable to the language prior conviction for a felony drug offense in 21 usc 841b1a because felony drug offense was defined in 21 usc 80244 as an offense that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year under any law of the united states or of a state C. holding that a felony drug offense is an offense punishable by more than one year as defined in 21 usc 80244 2000 regardless of whether the state of conviction classified the particular offense as a misdemeanor or felony D. holding that defendants prior felony convictions in georgia state court for drugrelated conspiracy and simple possession qualified as predicate prior felony drug offenses for 841b1a because under the plain language of the statute felony drug offense includes any criminal conduct relating to narcotics including simple possession which a state has proscribed as a felony E. holding that for purposes of applying enhanced penalty in 841b1a felony drug offense includes any crime punishable by more than one year of imprisonment regardless of whether it is classified as a felony or a misdemeanor

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that for purposes of applying enhanced penalty in 841b1a felony drug offense includes any crime punishable by more than one year of imprisonment regardless of whether it is classified as a felony or a misdemeanor
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 evidence was also found by the family court to be sufficient to support an order on January 29, 2008, enjoining Lisa from allowing Byles to be around L.S. “until further order of the court.” I would hold that the trial court erred in finding that Jesus was not immune from liability for defamation for his statements under Family Code section 261.106. I would further hold that the trial court erred in not hearing the jurisdictional facts pertinent to Jesus’s immunity defense before proceeding to trial on the merits of Byles’s defamation suit and entering judgment on Byles’s claim rather than dismissing Byles’s suit for lack of jurisdiction due to Byles’s failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See Miranda, 133 S.W.3d at 223; see also Brown, 13 S.W. at 472-73 (<HOLDING>); Alpert v. Crain, Caton & James, P.C., 178 Options: A. holding that an employer cannot be held liable under the ada if it had no knowledge of the employees alleged disability B. holding that an individual who is not served cannot be at fault or negligent in allowing a default judgment to be rendered C. holding that the individual defendant does not have to be in privity of contract with the plaintiff to be held liable under 1981 D. holding that no judgment can be rendered against defendant who cannot be held liable E. holding that it was error to dismiss complaint against individual defendants who had acted as agents of corporate trustee who could be held personally liable

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that no judgment can be rendered against defendant who cannot be held liable
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 instrument will expire and terminate (without relieving the Company of any obligations arising from a prior breach of or non-compliance with this instrument) upon (i) the issuance of stock to the Purchaser pursuant to Section 1(a); (ii) the sale of Tokens to the Purchaser pursuant to Section 1(b) where the Purchaser has elected to exchange this instrument as consideration for such Token; (iii) the payment, or setting aside for payment, of amounts due to the Purchaser pursuant to Section 1(c) or Section 1(d); or (iv) Twenty-Four (24) months from the Effective Date of this Agreement (“ Event Deadline ”). In the event this Agreement expires due to the Event Deadline, the Parties agree to the procedure and terms following the Signature Block to this Agreement under Exhibit A.

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: No Loan Party will, nor will it permit any Restricted Subsidiary to, enter into any arrangement, directly or indirectly, whereby it shall sell or transfer any property, real or personal, used or useful in its business, whether now owned or hereafter acquired, and thereafter rent or lease such property or other property that it intends to use for substantially the same purpose or purposes as the property sold or transferred (a “ Sale and Leaseback Transaction ”), except for any such sale of any fixed or capital assets by any Borrower or any Restricted Subsidiary that is made for cash consideration in an amount not less than the fair value of such fixed or capital asset.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: when the notice of the meeting of creditors and the notice of discharge were not returned to the sender. In fact, the presumption was strengthened by the fact that Herndon’s attorney did receive written notice of the debtor’s discharge within 5 days of mailing to the same address as the notice he allegedly claimed he did not receive. The only evidence presented was the declaration of Herndon’s attorney. That declaration was only general; stating that he did not receive the notice of the meeting of creditors. This was not sufficient to rebut the mailing presumption. B. Actual Notice The Ninth Circuit has held that notice is sufficient when the creditor has actual knowledge of the bankruptcy filing in time to file a complaint under § 523. In re Gordon, 988 F.2d 1000, 1001 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). Accord In re Walker, 927 F.2d 1138, 1145 Options: A. holding that notice to supervisor is notice to city B. holding that actual notice fulfills a notice requirement that an applicable federal regulation be conspicuously posted because actual notice is the best notice C. holding 57 days notice before deadline to file a complaint under 523 was sufficient notice when creditor had actual notice of filing D. holding that a creditor who had received actual notice of a bankruptcy proceeding through his counsel did not suffer a due process violation because he had notice in time to file a complaint or at least to file a timely motion for an extension of time E. holding that a defendant is not entitled to relief from default judgment because notice to an attorney of filing of motions and orders is constructive notice to the client even when the client did not have actual notice

assistant: The best answer is C. holding 57 days notice before deadline to file a complaint under 523 was sufficient notice when creditor had actual notice of filing
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 language used in this Agreement shall be deemed to be the language the parties hereto have chosen to express their mutual intent, and no rule of strict construction will be applied against any party hereto. The section headings and any table of contents contained in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower and the Guarantors will, and will cause each of their respective Subsidiaries to, comply in all respects with (i) all Applicable Laws now or hereafter in effect wherever its business is conducted, including all Environmental Laws, (ii) the provisions of its corporate charter, partnership agreement, limited liability company agreement or declaration of trust, as the case may be, and other charter documents and bylaws, (iii) all agreements and instruments to which it is a party or by which it or any of its properties may be bound, (iv) all applicable decrees, orders, and judgments, and (v) all licenses and permits required by Applicable Laws for the conduct of its business or the ownership, use or operation of its properties, except where a failure to so comply with any of clauses (i) through (v) could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. Borrower shall develop and implement such programs, policies and procedures as are necessary to comply with the Patriot Act and shall promptly advise Agent in writing in the event that Borrower shall determine that any investors in Borrower are in violation of such act.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 150 B.R. 912, 916 (W.D.N.C.1992) (enjoining Interstate Commerce Commission); In re Richmond Paramedical Servs., Inc., 94 B.R. 881, 882 (Bankr.E.D.Va.1988) (enjoining Department of Health and Human Services); In re Vantage Petroleum Corp., 25 B.R. 471, 477 (Bankr.E.D.N.Y.1982) (enjoining Department of Energy). Caselaw also supports, in appropriate circumstances, use by the bankruptcy court of section 105(a) of the Code to prohibit conduct otherwise permitted by virtue of one of the exceptions to the automatic stay of section 362(b). See In re Fussell, 928 F.2d 712, 713 (5th Cir.1991) (determining that criminal proceedings may be enjoined); In re Techs. Int’l Holdings, Inc., 234 B.R. 699, 702 (Bankr.E.D.Ky.1999) (enjoining state); In re Richmond Paramedical Servs., Inc., 94 B.R. at 882 (<HOLDING>); In re Sec. Gas & Oil, Inc., 70 B.R. 786, 792 Options: A. 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 B. holding that bankruptcy court could not enjoin third party tort claims that would not affect estate C. holding that bankruptcy court may enjoin state environmental reclamation order D. holding that bankruptcy court may enjoin federal administrative proceedings when they threaten the debtors estate E. holding bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to issue injunction of state court litigation against debtors principal stating this power under 11 usc 105a includes the authority to enjoin litigants from pursuing actions in other courts that threaten the integrity of the debtors estate

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that bankruptcy court may enjoin federal administrative proceedings when they threaten the debtors estate
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party agrees that irreparable damage would occur in the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement were not performed in accordance with their specific terms or were otherwise breached. Each Party agrees that, in the event of any breach or threatened breach by any other Party of any covenant or obligation contained in this Agreement, the non-breaching Party shall be entitled (in addition to any other remedy that may be available to it whether in law or equity, including monetary damages) to (a) a decree or order of specific performance to enforce the observance and performance of such covenant or obligation, and (b) an injunction restraining such breach or threatened breach.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrowers have undertaken a corporate reorganization effective as of January 1, 2016 pursuant to which (a) Rocky Brands Wholesale LLC changed its name to Rocky Brands US, LLC, (b) Creative Recreation, LLC and Creative Recreation Retail, LLC merged into Rocky US, and (c) Creative Recreation International, LLC merged into Rocky International. Notwithstanding the requirements of Section 7.15(b) of the Loan Agreement, Agent and Lenders hereby consent to such name change, and the schedules to the Loan Agreement shall be amended to reflect such changes. This consent shall not affect any other Default or Event of Default of the same or different nature arising at any time. This consent will not constitute a modification or an alteration of the terms, conditions or covenants of the Loan Agreement or the Other Documents, except as expressly described above. This consent will not relieve or release any Borrower or Guarantor in any way from its respective duties, obligations, covenants or agreements under the Loan Agreement or the Other Documents or from the consequences of any Default or Event of Default thereunder, except as expressly described above. This consent will not obligate Agent or Lenders, or be construed to require Agent or Lenders, to consent to any other departure from the requirements of the Loan Agreement. No course of dealing is established hereby.

assistant: Consents
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: CLIENT is responsible for the payment of any and all foreign, federal, state, county and local taxes and fees applicable to transactions under this contract and invoiced to CLIENT by FiCentive. CLIENT shall be responsible for the collection of all applicable end-user taxes and fees and the remittance of such taxes and fees to the relevant governmental authority.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment, and the Loan Agreement as modified by this Amendment, constitutes the legal, valid, and binding obligation of each Obligor, enforceable against each such Obligor in accordance with its terms, except to the extent that enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, moratorium, reorganization, or other similar laws affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights or by the effect of general equitable principles.

assistant: Enforceability
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: claim”. Williams (Willie), 4 Vet.App. at 273-74. 3. Litigation Stage. Having concluded that the Secretary was not substantially justified in his position at the administrative stage, the Court need not address whether the government’s litigation position before this Court was substantially justified. See Looker and ZP, both supra. III. Conclusion Accordingly, having concluded that the Court’s remand to the Board was based in part on a determination that the Board had committed an error of adjudication that was not substantially justified and that would itself constitute sufficient grounds for a remand, the Court grants the October 8, 1998, EAJA application and the December 7, 1998, supplemental EAJA application subject to a recalculation pursuant to Mannino, 12 Vet.App. at 244 (<HOLDING>). The appellant may file and serve on the Options: A. holding inter alia that common law claims were preempted B. holding that malicious prosecution plaintiff must show inter alia that criminal proceeding was initiated without probable cause C. holding that contact list based on inter alia information that was publicly available did not qualify as trade secret D. holding individual standing not available where inter alia there is no claim that plaintiff sustained a loss disproportionate to that sustained by the corporation E. holding inter alia that appellant must use local cpiu where available

assistant: The best answer is E. holding inter alia that appellant must use local cpiu where available
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: debt is merely presumed but not yet judicially determined to be nondischargeable, the automatic stay prevents university from refusing to provide transcript); Carson, 150 B.R. at 231-32 (“Once a student loan has been determined to be not dischargeable, a school may withhold ... delivery of a debtor’s transcripts as a means of collection.”). Essentially, the debtor only remained protected by the stay if there had not been a determination that the underlying debt was nondis-chargeable. Other courts, however, have employed a plain reading of § 362(a) to find a stay violation occurs and that a determination of dischargeability is irrelevant if a university refuses to provide a transcript upon request of a debtor during the pendency of the bankruptcy case. See Merchant, 958 F.2d at 741-42 (<HOLDING>); Hernandez, 2005 WL 1000059, at *3 (holding Options: A. holding that student debt declared nondischargeable remains subject to the automatic stay B. holding that the party challenging the dischargeability of a debt bears the burden of proving the debt nondischargeable by a preponderance of the evidence C. holding that even though the credit extension was a nondischargeable debt under 523a8 the university violated the stay because educational debts are not one of the listed exceptions found in 362b D. holding that university violated the automatic stay by withholding chapter 7 debtors transcripts because the debts were not yet determined nondischargeable E. holding that because nondischargeable debt based on fraud was not one of the four enumerated exceptions to exempt property the exempt property was not liable for the creditors surviving claim

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that even though the credit extension was a nondischargeable debt under 523a8 the university violated the stay because educational debts are not one of the listed exceptions found in 362b
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: Mont. 200, 936 P.2d 814, 818-20 (1997) (allowing discovery of injuries caused by similar products and discovery about various product models as relevant to whether the design was unreasonably dangerous and whether the defendant was aware of the danger and a viable alternative design); Calo v. Ahearn, 135 A.D.2d 458, 522 N.Y.S.2d 555, 556 (1987) (“Although the vehicle type of the automobile involved in the accident was the subject of the recall campaign, it is undisputed that the Ahearn vehicle was not among those listed in the recall. However, it was within the legitimate scope of discovery to attempt to determine if the recall campaign erroneously omitted vehicles with the same or similar steering defects.”); Culligan v. Yamaha Motor Corp., USA, 110 F.R.D. 122, 124-25 (S.D.N.Y. 1986) (<HOLDING>). We are especially disinclined to second-guess Options: A. holding that evidence of subsequent measures was admissible to show the feasibility of a design change B. holding that information about postmanufacture testing was relevant and discoverable in atv rollover case even though it dealt with models other than the atv model at issue in order to show feasibility of alternative designs C. holding that claim preclusion did not apply even though the legal theory at issue in that case was addressed in a previous case because the case at issue was based on a different set of operative facts D. holding prior drug convictions relevant to show that defendant had knowledge and intent necessary to possess drugs at issue in case E. holding prior conclusion properly considered dicta rather than alternative holding because prior ra tionale could not be considered as alternative holding because it could not support the judgment in the case

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that information about postmanufacture testing was relevant and discoverable in atv rollover case even though it dealt with models other than the atv model at issue in order to show feasibility of alternative designs
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No ERISA Event has occurred or is reasonably expected to occur that, when taken together with all other such ERISA Events for which liability is reasonably expected to occur, would reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. Except as would not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect, each Plan is in compliance with the applicable provisions of ERISA.

assistant: Erisa
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 as of the date first above written upon receipt by the Administrative Agent of counterparts hereof, duly executed by each of the parties hereto and acknowledged by the Performance Guarantor. Except as expressly amended hereby, the Agreement shall remain unaltered and in full force and effect.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: `` duolingo , '' `` tinycards '' and all other trademarks , service marks , graphics and logos used in connection with the service are trademarks or service marks of duolingo or their respective owners , and certain of them are registered with the united states patent and trademark office .

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: transfer from New Orleans to Harvey was not an adverse employment action. Cooper had the same title and benefits in Harvey as he did in New Orleans. Though a longer commute may have been inconvenient for Cooper, we cannot say that the new position was objectively worse such that it was the equivalent of a demotion. See Johnson v. TCB Constr. Co., 334 Fed.Appx. 666, 671 (5th Cir.2009) (per curiam) (“[Although the new job site was 30 or 35 minutes from [Plaintiff’s] home, there is no evidence ... that [the Plaintiffs] new commute was unreasonable.” (citing Sanchez v. Denver Pub. Schs., 164 F.3d 527, 532 (10th Cir.1998) (commute time increase from 5-7 to 3(M0 minutes did not constitute an adverse employment action))); Spring v. Sheboygan Area Sch. Dist., 865 F.2d 883, 886 (7th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); see also Gray v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 131 Options: A. holding that denial of a bonus was not an adverse employment action B. holding that termination is an adverse employment action C. holding that deprivation of increased compensation as the result of a failure to train constitutes an adverse employment action D. holding that change in employment assignment that inter alia increased onthejob commuting time was not an adverse employment action E. holding that suspension with pay was not adverse employment action

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that change in employment assignment that inter alia increased onthejob commuting time was not an adverse employment action