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: are also supported by the evidence. The witness paid elose attention to the burglar. She was not frightened by him, but instead focused upon his face in an attempt to determine who he was. Cf. State v. LeClair, 118 N.H. 214, 220, 385 A.2d 831, 834 (1978) (implying that the fact that the witness was “scared” and acted “like he was in shock” at the time of the robbery would have lessened the degree of attention he paid to the features of the suspect). Her identification of the defendant should not be discounted simply because she is not a police officer specially trained to observe details. Further, her description of the burglar, although lacking in some details, substantially agreed with the defendant’s appearance. See State v. Heald, 120 N.H. 319, 323, 414 A.2d 1288, 1290 (1980) (<HOLDING>); see also State v. Allard, 123 N.H. 209, 214, Options: A. holding that selfinterested witnesses can be reliable when they provide detailed testimony that is corroborated by other witnesses or facts B. holding that material for witnesses need not be produced to defendant where the witnesses were not called as government witnesses at trial C. holding that the government had established necessity for wiretaps despite its use of three cooperating witnesses because those witnesses were able to give agents only limited information not including the names of all members of the conspiracy D. holding that the descriptions given by three witnesses were sufficiently accurate despite the fact that they varied in detail E. holding where the plaintiff presented evidence which demonstrates that the terms alleged by the defendants to be indefinite were in fact sufficiently well delineated to all parties the entry of judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of the defendants was inappropriate despite the fact that the defendants contested the plaintiffs evidence concerning the manner in which the relevant contractual language should be construed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the descriptions given by three witnesses were sufficiently accurate despite the fact that they varied in detail
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: Pledgor’s or Pledgor Guarantor’s audited annual financial statements or the notes thereto or other opinions or conclusions stated therein shall be qualified or limited by reference to the status of Pledgor or Pledgor Guarantor as a “going concern” or a reference of similar import.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of action for vicarious liability against Gerelco. We note, however, that the Legislature in 2003 expressly provided that the immunities in the statute extended to "vicarious liability.” Ch. 2003-412, § 14, Laws of Fla. (amending § 440.11(1)). Also, cases suggesting that such vicarious liability is available were either decided under the statute before it was amended in 2003, Wright v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., 823 So.2d 241 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), or involve the unique context of sovereign immunity where, by statute, a cause of action in negligence against a government employee is barred because an alternative remedy against the employing government is expressly authorized. See § 768.28(9)(a), Fla. Stat. (2014); see also Aravena v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 928 So.2d 1163, 1168 (Fla.2006) (<HOLDING>); Holmes Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Duffell, 651 So.2d Options: A. holding that the legislature has in clear and unambiguous language waived sovereign immunity against elected public officials and governmental entities defined by the act to be employers B. holding that sovereign immunity barred a wrongful death claim against the board and stating that the only question is whether the boards sovereign immunity protection was waived emphasis added C. holding that sovereign immunity barred claim for compensatory sanctions against the government D. holding that as a general rule interlocutory trial court orders rejecting defenses of common law sovereign immunity governmental immunity public official immunity statutory immunity or any other type of immunity are not appealable under the maryland collateral order doctrine E. holding under the sovereign immunity statute any negligence claim arising under the unrelated works exception against a public coemployee must be brought against the governmental entity employer

assistant: The best answer is E. holding under the sovereign immunity statute any negligence claim arising under the unrelated works exception against a public coemployee must be brought against the governmental entity employer
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 Loan Parties shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Agent and each other Credit Party and any employee, officer, agent or Affiliate of the Agent and other Credit Parties (each, an “ Indemnified Person ”) harmless of and from any claim brought or threatened against any Indemnified Person by the Borrower, any guarantor or endorser of the Liabilities, or any other Person (as well as from attorneys’ fees and expenses in connection therewith) on account of the relationship of the Borrower or of any other guarantor or endorser of the Liabilities with the Agent and other Credit Parties (each, an “ Indemnified Claim ”) other than any claim resulting from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of such Indemnified Person as determined by a final, non-appealable judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. Each Indemnified Claim may be defended, compromised, settled, or pursued by the Indemnified Person with counsel of the Agent’s selection (and if such Indemnified Claim is brought by a Person other than the Loan Parties, any guarantor or endorser of the Liabilities or any Affiliate of the Loan Parties, after consultation with (but not approval of) the Loan Parties regarding the selection of such counsel), but at the expense of the Borrower; provided that any Indemnified Claim may not be settled without the consent of the Loan Parties (which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed) if as the result of any such settlement the Loan Parties will be obligated to make any payment (other than reimbursement of the costs and expenses of the Indemnified Person). This indemnification shall survive payment of the Liabilities and/or any termination, release, or discharge executed by the Agent in favor of the Borrower or any other Loan Party, other than a termination, release, or discharge which makes specific reference to this Section 14-11 .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Every notice or other communication relating to this Agreement between the Company and the Participant shall be in writing, and shall be mailed to or delivered to the party for whom it is intended at such address as may from time to time be designated by it in a notice mailed or delivered to the other party as herein provided; provided that, unless and until some other address be so designated, all notices or communications by the Participant to the Company shall be mailed or delivered to the Company at its principal executive office, to the attention of the [Company Secretary], and all notices or communications by the Company to the Participant may be given to the Participant personally or may be mailed to the Participant at the Participant’s last known address, as reflected in the Company’s records. Notwithstanding the above, all notices and communications between the Participant and any third-party plan administrator shall be mailed, delivered, transmitted or sent in accordance with the procedures established by such third-party plan administrator and communicated to the Participant from time to time.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party shall secure and maintain in full force and effect throughout the Term (and following termination, to the extent necessary to cover any claims arising from this Agreement) commercial general liability insurance and product liability (in the case of Amgen only) which include contractual liability with limits of no less than five million dollars ($5,000,000.00 USD); professional liability insurance (in the case of Dialysis Center only) with limits of no less than five million dollars ($5,000,000.00 USD), and workers’ compensation with statutory limits. Any limits on each of a Party’s insurance coverage shall not be construed to create any limit on such Party’s liability with respect to its obligations under this Agreement or otherwise. Each of the Parties shall have the right to satisfy its obligations under this Section 9.4 through self-insurance. Amgen Inc. hereby guarantees the performance of Amgen’s obligations as set forth in this Section 9.4 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: offered and the funds that [the] plaintiff in Braden alleged should have been offered.” ECF No. 56 at 11. The same is true here: Terraza alleges that the Defendants could have offered the exact same investment option for a lower price based on the Plan’s size. The Court can reasonably infer from this allegation that the Defendants acted imprudently by selecting the more expensive option, all else being equal. Although the Defendants may ultimately persuade the Court that they had legitimate reasons to select the challenged investment options, and thus did not act imprudently, Terraza has satisfied her burden at this stage of the litigation by alleging facts from which the Court can reasonably infer that the Defendants’ decision-making process was flawed. See Braden, 588 F.3d at 596 (<HOLDING>). Defendants argue that the challenged expense Options: A. holding that the plaintiff waived an objection to the defendants failure to plead qualified immunity as an affirmative defense B. holding that to rebut presumption plaintiff need only allege specific facts not plead evidence C. holding that although the defendants could have chosen funds with higher fees for various reasons rule 8 does not require a plaintiff to plead facts tending to rebut all possible lawful explanations for a defendants conduct D. holding that a plaintiff does not have to possess actual knowledge of all the relevant facts in order for the cause of action to accrue E. holding that defendant failed to plead sufficient facts and instructing the trial court to dismiss the plaintiff from the case

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that although the defendants could have chosen funds with higher fees for various reasons rule 8 does not require a plaintiff to plead facts tending to rebut all possible lawful explanations for a defendants conduct
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: ("If the intent of Congress is clear, that is the end of the matter; for the court, as well as the agency, must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress.”). 11 . This circuit has already determined that the ninety-day statutory deadline for filing a motion to reopen may be tolled. See Riley v. INS, 310 F.3d 1253, 1257-58 (10th Cir.2002). Accordingly, it is not a jurisdictional limit and should not be raised sua sponte. Other circuits are in accord. See Socop-Gonzalez v. INS, 272 F.3d 1176, 1190-93 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc); Iavorski v. INS, 232 F.3d 124, 130-34 (2d Cir.2000). My colleagues apparently assume that the filing deadline contained in § 1229a(c)(6)(B) is similarly not a jurisdictional restriction. Cf. Pervaiz v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 488, 490 (7th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); Borges v. Gonzales, 402 F.3d 398, 405-06 (3d Options: A. holding that an aliens departure based on an in absentia removal order does not necessarily deprive an ij of jurisdiction to decide a motion to reopen B. recognizing that orders denying motions to reopen are treated as final orders of removal C. holding that the 180day filing deadline is jurisdictional and mandatory D. holding that the 180day filing deadline applicable to motions to reopen from removal orders filed in absentia is not jurisdictional E. holding that district court had no authority to reopen appeal period when motion was filed beyond 180day limit

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the 180day filing deadline applicable to motions to reopen from removal orders filed in absentia is not jurisdictional
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 juvenile probation officers and evaluating psychologist all admitted that lying to police officers and probation would not support a finding that appellant is amenable to probation and programming. Appellant argues that this factor should weigh in favor of EJJ because he was never offered formal programming and that the district court erred in considering informal programming in his home and school. However, we have consistently held that, in the consideration of this factor, the district court may evaluate the juvenile’s willingness to cooperate with informal programming by considering his behavior in school, home, and juvenile detention and his affiliations with gangs. See In re Welfare of P.C.T., 823 N.W.2d 676, 683 (Minn.App.2012), review denied (Minn. Feb. 19, 2013) (<HOLDING>); see also In re Welfare of N.J.S., 753 N.W.2d Options: A. 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 B. holding that the court without violating due process of the law may conduct a hearing to determine whether to waive juvenile jurisdiction even if the juvenile fails to appear if counsel is present and allowed to participate on the juveniles behalf C. holding juveniles do not have constitutional right to a jury trial but striking down statute that allowed juveniles to receive adult sentence without a jury trial three justices dissented reasoning juveniles should be entitled to a juiy trial under all cases because changes to juvenile justice code treated juveniles like criminals D. recognizing juveniles right to counsel in certain juvenile proceedings E. holding that the juveniles failure to go to school or participate in online schooling did not support a finding that he was willing to cooperate with juvenile programming

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the juveniles failure to go to school or participate in online schooling did not support a finding that he was willing to cooperate with juvenile programming
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: it retrospectively.” Hydro-Manufacturing, Inc. v. Kayser-Roth Corp., 640 A.2d 950, 954-55 (R.I.1994) (quoting VanMarter v. Royal Indemnity Co., 556 A.2d 41, 44 (R.I.1989)). Here, no specific language in the 1994 amendments supports defendants’ position that these enactments retroactively stripped Wilkinson of his full-status employment. In the absence of such language, or indeed any evidence to the contrary, this Court will apply the general rule that “statutes operate prospectively from and after the effective date of the statute. It is only in the event that a statute contains clear and explicit language requiring retroactive application that a statute will be interpreted to operate retrospectively.” Avanzo v. Rhode Island Department of Human Services, 625 A.2d 208, 211 (R.I.1993) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the 1994 amendments affecting the Options: A. holding that the statute does not apply retroactively to claims accruing prior to the effective date B. holding that the title of the statute did not limit the reach of the statute C. holding that attempt by governmental entity to apply a statute changing welfare eligibility requirements by establishing a limit on the length of time a totally incapacitated adult might receive benefits should not have been applied to existing recipients by counting benefit months prior to the effective date of the statute D. holding that for purposes of counting strikes under 1915g it is irrelevant whether the strikes occurred prior to or after the effective date of the aedpa E. holding that when governmental entity asserts affirmative claim for monetary damages against party entity does not have immunity from partys claims germane to connected to and properly defensive to claims asserted by the entity to the extent any recovery on those claims will offset any recovery by entity

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that attempt by governmental entity to apply a statute changing welfare eligibility requirements by establishing a limit on the length of time a totally incapacitated adult might receive benefits should not have been applied to existing recipients by counting benefit months prior to the effective date of the statute
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 Administrative Agent shall have received all fees and other amounts due and payable pursuant to fee letters between the Borrower and the Joint Bookrunners in respect of this Agreement on or prior to the Effective Date, including, to the extent invoiced, reimbursement or payment of all out-of-pocket expenses (including reasonable out-of-pocket fees, charges and disbursements of counsel) required to be reimbursed or paid by the Borrower hereunder or under any other Loan Document.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: like the currency, depreciate through over-issue. The mind of an appellate judge is habitually receptive to the suggestion that a lower court committed an error. But receptiveness declines as the number of assigned errors increases. Multiplicity hints at lack of confidence in any one.''). 44 . See Jackson v. Shanks, 143 F.3d 1313, 1320 (10th Cir.1998) (denying relief under Strickland because "[gjenerally, the decision whether to call a witness rests within the sound discretion of trial counsel.”); United States v. Snyder, 787 F.2d 1429, 1432 (10th Cir.1986) (denying relief under Strickland because “[w]hether to call a particular witness is a tactical decision, and, thus, a matter of discretion for trial counsel.”). 45 . See Snow v. Sirmons, 474 F.3d 693, 724 (10th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); Parker v. Scott, 394 F.3d 1302, 1321 (10th Options: A. holding that failure to object to admissible evidence was not ineffective assistance of counsel B. holding counsels failure to object to victim impact testimony and evidence was not ineffective assistance of counsel when the trial record was silent as to counsels strategy C. recognizing a constitutional claim for ineffective assistance of counsel D. holding that the failure of defense counsel to object to erroneous punishment charge authorizing an illegal sentence is ineffective assistance of counsel E. holding no ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim for failure to raise as basis for appeal of conviction ineffective assistance of trial counsel where basis for the latter claim was inadequate

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that failure to object to admissible evidence was not ineffective assistance of counsel
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Award will vest on December 31, 2020 (the “Vesting Date”) if you remain employed by the Company through the Vesting Date and remain in your current role, or remain employed but relinquish the CFO position at the request of the Board of Directors as part of the Company’s succession process.

assistant: Vesting
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: wrongdoer, whether the wrongdoer dies before or after the death of the person injured. I.C. § 5-311(1) (emphasis added). A wrongful death claim is “an entirely new cause of action____” Castorena v. Gen. Elec., 149 Idaho 609, 616, 238 P.3d 209, 216 (2010). This cause of action is “entirely distinct from any action the decedent may have brought on her own behalf, prior to her death____” Id. at 619, 238 P.3d at 219 (citing Russell v. Cox, 65 Idaho 534, 539, 148 P.2d 221, 223 (1944)). Further, we have held that a judgment granted in a wrongful death action “inures to the benefit of the hens of the decedent and in no ease becomes a part of the assets of the estate of the deceased.” Whitley, 23 Idaho at 659, 132 P. at 126; see also Moon v. Bullock, 65 Idaho 594, 605, 151 P.2d 765, 770 (1944) (<HOLDING>), overruled on other grounds by Doggett v. Options: A. recognizing that a claim is an assertion of a right and if there is no assertion of a right there is no claim to deduct B. holding that if no notice was given prior to the institution of an action a condition precedent to the right to bring the action does not exist and the buyerplaintiff has lost the right of his remedy C. holding that no private right of action exists D. holding that no right of action is given to the estate of the victim of a tort but is granted only to his heirs if there are no heirs no right of action vests in anybody E. holding fact that estate may ultimately distribute cash to heirs does not convert estates claim to claim by heirs for purpose of estoppel

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that no right of action is given to the estate of the victim of a tort but is granted only to his heirs if there are no heirs no right of action vests in anybody
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: under § 523(a)(4). Cobham appeals. We review the judgment of a district court sitting in review of a bankruptcy court de novo, applying the same standards of review that were applied in the district court. In re Shangra-La, Inc., 167 F.3d 843, 847 (4th Cir. 1999). Specifically, the bankruptcy court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error, and legal determinations are reviewed de novo. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8013; In re K & L Lakeland, Inc., 128 F.3d 203, 206 (4th Cir. 1997). We have reviewed the record included on appeal, and the parties’ briefs, and find that the bankruptcy court correctly determined that LeCann met her burden of establishing that the debt at issue is non-dischargeable under § 523(a)(6). See Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 291, 111 S.Ct. 654, 112 L.Ed.2d 755 (1991) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we affirm on the bankruptcy Options: A. holding that appellant bears burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence B. holding that the defendant bears the burden of proving outside contact with the jury C. holding that the party challenging the dischargeability of a debt bears the burden of proving the debt nondischargeable by a preponderance of the evidence D. holding that a creditor objecting to the dischargeability of a debt under 523a must prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence E. holding that effect of discharge of debt under bankruptcy code is the same as it was under the 1898 bankruptcy act it is not an extinguishment of the debt but only a bar to enforcement of the debt as a personal obligation of the debt or

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the party challenging the dischargeability of a debt bears the burden of proving the debt nondischargeable by a preponderance of the evidence
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’”); O’Hare v. Municipal Resource Consultants, 107 Cal.App.4th 267, 284, 132 Cal.Rptr.2d 116 (2003) (“In this case, the 1991 employment contract begins: ‘Confirming our recent conversation, this Agreement sets forth the terms of your employment.’ The typed eight-page document appears to be a boilerplate contract givén to all employees who have access to confidential information. It contains multiple generic provisions. The only portion filled in by hand is O’Hare’s salary: $50,000 a year. Nothing in this document suggests it was the product of ‘give and take.’ In fact, the arbitration provision is so one-sided it defies credulity to suggest either [that] O’Hare had any input on that issue or [that] any expressed desire to change its terms would have b Cal.Rptr.3d 88 (2004) (<HOLDING>); Gutierrez v. Autowest, Inc., 114 Cal.App.4th Options: A. holding that an arbitration clause was not unconscionable because it did not unreasonably favor the defendants B. holding that failure to attach the aaa arbitration rules weighed in favor of a finding of procedural unconscionability C. holding that an arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable because it was imposed on employees as a condition of employment and there was no opportunity to negotiate D. holding that an arbitration in accordance with aaa rules is a binding arbitration E. holding that an arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable because it did not attach the aaa rules

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable because it did not attach the aaa rules
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event any Lender shall incur any loss or expense (including any loss (other than lost profit) or expense incurred by reason of the liquidation or reemployment of deposits or other funds acquired by such Lender to make, continue or maintain any portion of the principal amount of any Loan as, or to convert any portion of the principal amount of any Loan into, a Eurodollar Loan) as a result of any conversion of a Eurodollar Loan to an ABR Loan or repayment or prepayment of the principal amount of any Eurodollar Loan on a date other than the scheduled last day of the Interest Period applicable thereto, whether pursuant to Section 2.03, 2.05, 2.07, 2.14, 2.15 or 2.20 or otherwise, or any failure to borrow or convert any Eurodollar Loan after notice thereof shall have been given hereunder, whether by reason of any failure to satisfy a condition to such Borrowing or otherwise, then, upon the written notice of such Lender to Borrower (with a copy to the Administrative Agent), Borrower shall, within ten (10) Business Days of the receipt by Borrower thereof, pay directly to such Lender such amount as shall (in the reasonable determination of such Lender) reimburse such Lender for such loss or expense. Such written notice (which shall include calculations in reasonable detail) shall, in the absence of manifest error, be conclusive and binding on Borrower.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower agrees (a) to pay or reimburse the Agents for all reasonable and documented out of pocket costs and expenses incurred in connection with the preparation, negotiation, syndication and execution of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents and any amendment, waiver, consent or other modification of the provisions hereof and thereof (whether or not the transactions contemplated thereby are consummated), and the consummation and administration of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby, including all Attorney Costs of Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP , and (b) to pay or reimburse the Administrative Agent and the Lenders for all reasonable and documented out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred in connection with the enforcement of any rights or remedies under this Agreement or the other Loan Documents (including all such costs and expenses incurred during any legal proceeding, including any proceeding under any Debtor Relief Law, and including all Attorney Costs of counsel to the Administrative Agent). The agreements in this Section 10.04 shall survive the termination of the Aggregate Commitments and repayment of all other Obligations. All amounts due under this Section 10.04 shall be paid promptly following receipt by the Borrower of an invoice relating thereto setting forth such expenses in reasonable detail. If any Loan Party fails to pay when due any costs, expenses or other amounts payable by it hereunder or under any Loan Document, such amount may be paid on behalf of such Loan Party by the Administrative Agent in its sole discretion.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Other than the fees payable to the Placement Agent as described in Section 7.7 below, no brokerage or finder’s fees or commissions are or will be payable by the Company to any broker, financial advisor or consultant, finder, placement agent, investment banker, bank or other person with respect to the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. The Investors shall have no obligation with respect to any fees or with respect to any claims made by or on behalf of other persons for fees of a type contemplated in this Section that may be due in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents except that the proceeds from purchase and sale of the Units shall be used to pay the fee payable to the Placement Agent pursuant to the terms of the Placement Agent Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: third issue, Penright asserts that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to conduct a hearing on his motion for new trial and motion in arrest of judgment. The record reflects that the trial court had scheduled a hearing on the motion for new trial but was unable to conduct the hearing as anticipated due to scheduling conflicts. As a result, Penrighf s motion for new trial was overruled by-operation of law. We abated this appeal and ordered the trial court to hold a hearing on the motion for new trial. The trial court held a hearing, and we have considered the record from that hearing on appeal. Therefore Penrighf s third issue is moot. See Highfill v. State, No. 03-00-00126-CR, 2001 WL 520978, at *10 (Tex.App.-Austin May 17, 2001, no pet.) (not designated for publication) (<HOLDING>). We overrule Penrighf s' third issue. Options: A. holding appellants issue was rendered moot because appellant was given the opportunity to make a record in support of his motion for new trial and appellate court considered that record in disposing of only issue raised in the motion for new trial B. holding issue not properly before the appellate court where appellant fails to demonstrate where in the record an issue was raised in the district court C. holding that because defendant never mentioned brady in motion for new trial appellate court would not consider the issue D. holding where record fails to establish whether and how appellant presented motion for new trial to the trial court it was not timely presented E. holding that if appellant preserves legal sufficiency complaint in motion for new trial new trial is all the relief appellate court can give because that is all the relief appellant requested in trial court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding appellants issue was rendered moot because appellant was given the opportunity to make a record in support of his motion for new trial and appellate court considered that record in disposing of only issue raised in the motion for new trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In consideration of the waivers contained herein, each of the Loan Parties hereby waives and releases the Lenders, the Administrative Agent, the Swingline Lender and the Issuing Bank from any and all claims and defenses, known or unknown, existing on the date hereof with respect to the Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents and the transactions contemplated thereby.

assistant: Releases
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 separate counterparts, each of which, when so executed, shall be deemed an original, and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute but one and the same instrument.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas and applied without giving effect to any conflicts of laws principles. Any matters litigated by, among, or between any of the parties and that involve matters under this Agreement shall be brought only in a court of competent jurisdiction in Travis County, Texas.

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: Except as otherwise set forth herein, each Party shall pay all of its own costs and expenses incident to its negotiation and preparation of this Lease Agreement and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, including the fees, expenses and disbursements of its counsel and advisors. This Section 15(e) shall survive termination of this Lease Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: practice ‘occurs’ for purposes of Title VII’s timing provisions and holding that “[a] discrete retaliatory or discriminatory act ‘occurred’ on the day that it ‘happened.’ ”). In Stewart v. Ashcroft, 352 F.3d 422 (D.C.Cir. 2003), the court of appeals held that an allegedly discriminatory non-promotion occurs on the date that the selected applicant assumes her or his new position. Id. at 425. In Stewart, the plaintiff initiated EEO procedures on August 12, 1998, while the promoted employee assumed his new role on February 3, 1998 — well over 100 days earlier. Id. Because the promotion became effective on February 3, 1998, the court of appeals deemed the complaint untimely. Id.; see also Armstrong v. Jackson, Civil Action No. 05-75(JDB), 2006 WL 2024975 at =‘4 (D.D.C. July 17, 2006) (<HOLDING>). Here, Davis’ hiring became effective March Options: A. holding that the date of the federal indictment not the date of the state arrest was the triggering date for the speedytrial act B. holding that the commission on remand can set the effective date of a rate to be the effective date of the original commission activity C. holding that the date on which the plaintiff learned of the defendants denial of tenure not the date on which the plaintiff became unemployed was when the statute of limitations began to run D. holding that limitations period on employment discrimination claim triggered on date of discharge not on date of discovery of discriminatory intent E. holding that the date of discrimination is the date on which a decision not to hire a plaintiff becomes effective

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the date of discrimination is the date on which a decision not to hire a plaintiff becomes effective
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: proceedings, we find no indication in the record that the Tribe actually participated or formally intervened in the ancillary proceedings prior to 1998. Our conclusion on this point finds further support in the fact that the Tribe’s interest in the District’s and Corkill’s petitions for review of the Engineer’s decision changed dramatically when, upon the Engineer’s ultimate decision' disposing of the remaining applications, the Tribe’s status changed from applicant to victor. Prior to that time, as one applicant among many, the Tribe could not reasonably have foreseen that its rights in a future action reviewing the Engineer’s ultimate decision could be foreclosed by the outcome of an ancillary proceeding. See Moore v. District Court, 77 Nev. 357, 363, 364 P.2d 1073, 1077 (1961) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, although the ancillary proceedings Options: A. holding that because appellant did not become a party by intervention before judgment was rendered appellant may not extend the time to appeal by filing a motion for new trial B. holding that a motion requesting a trial judge to disqualify himself and the affidavit in support thereof were insufficient in part due to their conclusory nature C. holding that an intervening party was not precluded from filing an affidavit to disqualify a judge despite the fact that there had been an earlier motion to set the cause for trial because the intervenors did not become parties to the action until their motion for intervention was granted D. holding that a year delay in filing a motion to disqualify did not bar the motion where there was no evidence that the motion was inspired by dilatory tactics E. holding that a fivemonth delay in filing a motion to disqualify did not bar the motion where there was a reasonable explanation for the delay

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an intervening party was not precluded from filing an affidavit to disqualify a judge despite the fact that there had been an earlier motion to set the cause for trial because the intervenors did not become parties to the action until their motion for intervention was granted
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: Schedule 6.10 lists all of Seller Parent’s, Seller’s, each Company’s, OP Seller’s Property Manager’s, and the Cedarhurst Manager’s policies of property and casualty insurance and liability insurance currently in effect and covering the Business and the Real Property, copies of which have been made available for review by Purchaser. Each such policy held by Seller Parent, Seller, each Company and OP Seller’s Property Manager currently is in full force and effect and, to Seller’s Knowledge, each such policy of the Cedarhurst Manager currently is in full force and effect. To Seller’s Knowledge, none of Seller Parent, Seller, any Company, OP Seller’s Property Manager, or the Cedarhurst Manager has taken or failed to take any action, including, without limitation, the failure to give any notice or information, which would limit or impair any of Seller Parent’s, Seller’s, OP Seller’s Property Manager, any Company’s, or the Cedarhurst Manager’s rights thereunder with respect to any matter for which Purchaser could be held liable as a successor to Seller Parent or Seller. Schedule 6.10 lists any pending, unresolved claims under (a) Seller Parent’s, Seller’s, any Company’s or OP Seller’s Property Manager’s policies of property and casualty or liability insurance and (b) to Seller’s Knowledge, the Cedarhurst Manager’s policies covering the Real Property or the Business, as well as all claims made and resolved within the past three (3) years. None of Seller Parent, Seller, any Company or OP Seller’s Property Manager, or, to Seller’s Knowledge, the Cedarhurst Manager, has received written, or to Seller’s Knowledge, oral, notice of any pending cancellation or nonrenewal of such policies.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the information provided within the service is not intended for distribution to or use by any person or entity in any jurisdiction or country where such distribution or use would be contrary to law or regulation or which would subject instagram to any registration requirement within such jurisdiction or country .

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: for a valid charging lien set forth by the supreme court in Sinclair, Louis, Siegel, Heath, Nussbaum & Zavertnik, P.A. v. Baucom, 428 So.2d 1383, 1385 (Fla.1983). “In order to give timely notice of a charging lien an attorney should either file a notice of lien or otherwise pursue the lien in the original action.” Daniel Mones, P.A. v. Smith, 486 So.2d 559, 560 (Fla.1986) (citing Sinclair, Louis, 428 So.2d at 1385). Notice is timely where the charging hen is filed prior to entry of the final judgment. See Gaebe, Murphy, Mullen & Antonelli v. Bradt, 704 So.2d 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Conversely, an attorney’s charging hen is untimely and may not be established in proceedings after final judgment has been entered. See Milio v. Leinoff & Silvers, P.A., 668 So.2d 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (<HOLDING>). Here, Mr. Johnson did not give notice of Options: A. holding premature notice of appeal was treated as entered on date of entry of final judgment B. holding in part as a general rule a trial courts judgment becomes final thirty days after its entry unless a party files a timely notice of appeal or specified posttrial motion C. holding that the trial court had no jurisdiction to modify its final order more than 30 days after its final judgment D. holding attorney may not wait more than thirty days from the entry of final judgment give notice of nonrepresentation and then seek to enforce a hen not noticed before the entry of the final judgment E. holding that a district court judgment is not a final judgment appealable by the defendant unless it includes the final adjudication and the final sentence

assistant: The best answer is D. holding attorney may not wait more than thirty days from the entry of final judgment give notice of nonrepresentation and then seek to enforce a hen not noticed before the entry of the final judgment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is, we assume, an unusual way to operate as a middleman. Compton’s inclusion of these details regarding Brian Howard’s modus operandi thus suggested some particularized basis of knowledge. And, as discussed below, these details provided investigators with the opportunity to corroborate Compton’s tip. In all, however, Compton’s tip as described in the affidavit was largely devoid of detail, and the affidavit failed to state how Compton came to his knowledge of Defendant’s operation. For those reasons, Compton’s basis of knowledge did little to bolster the credibility of his tip. See Helton, 314 F.3d at 822. C. Corroboration Where the veracity and basis of knowledge of an informant have been thoroughly established, corroboration of the tip may not be necessary. See Allen, 211 F.3d at 976 (<HOLDING>); Williams, 544 F.3d at 690 (“named informants, Options: A. holding an informants tip can establish reasonable suspicion without investigative confirmation if the tip is credible B. holding corroboration of named informants statements some of which included suspects hearsay enhanced informants reliability C. recognizing that although not a key detail corroboration of defendants name residence and make of vehicle lent credence to informants tip D. holding corroboration is not a necessity where confidential informants reliability was well established and his tip was based on direct personal observation of criminal activity E. holding an informants tip if questionable can be corroborated by the observation of lawful conduct

assistant: The best answer is D. holding corroboration is not a necessity where confidential informants reliability was well established and his tip was based on direct personal observation of criminal activity
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 Grant Certificate and the Equity Plan constitute the entire agreement between the parties hereto with regard to the subject matter hereof. They supersede all other agreements, representations or understandings (whether oral or written and whether express or implied) that relate to the Award. By accepting the Award, the Participant shall be deemed to accept all of the terms and conditions of the Grant Certificate and the Equity Plan.

assistant: Entire Agreements