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: the last sentence of the statute. The statute sets forth the duty a vehicle operator has to pedestrians. The last sentence of section 41-6-80 states that the seetion sets aside any conflicting provision of the traffic rules and regulations found in chapter 6 of the annotated Utah Code or of a local ordinance. The plain language of the section clearly states that if either a local ordinance or a state statute under chapter 6 creates a duty for a vehicle operator that is any more or less than that stated in this section (which, inter alia, is to exercise the appropriate pre caution upon observing any child), that ordinance or statute is set aside. See Utah Code Ann. § 41-6-80. 150 The jury was given several instructions on the various duties of a driver and also on those of a pe .1992) (<HOLDING>); Shpigel v. White, 357 Md. 117, 741 A2d 1205, Options: A. holding that jury should decide whether plaintiffs testimony proved reasonable and necessary medical expenses B. holding that debtors have the burden of proving that other necessary expenses on form b22c are actual reasonable and necessary expenses and that these expenses should be considered in light of schedule j and other relevant evidence C. holding that medical expenses must be proven to be both reasonable and necessary D. holding that reliance must be proven by some evidence E. holding that a statutory entitlement to payment for reasonable and necessary medical treatment cannot give rise to a property interest until the payments in question have been proven to be reasonable and necessary

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that medical expenses must be proven to be both reasonable and necessary
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: no counseling and no transportation. The testimony, however, reveals that DHR held 10 ISP meetings, that DHR established a list of goals for the mother to reach, that DHR referred the mother to the Calhoun County Family Drug Court Program, that DHR provided the mother with a drug assessment that the mother did not complete until April 2014, that DHR paid for the mother’s substance abuse counseling at New Directions, that DHR provided the children with counseling, that DHR provided the mother with visitation, and that DHR provided the mother with transportation to visits. The record supports a conclusion that DHR did make reasonable efforts to reunite the mother with the children and that the mother did not make sufficient progress. See J.P. v. S.S., 989 So.2d 591, 601 (Ala.Civ.App.2008)(<HOLDING>). The juvenile court could have also been Options: A. holding that the trial court had erred in imposing an obligation to pay child support when clear and convincing evidence established that the husband was not the father of the child B. holding that dhr properly ended reunification efforts after eight months when previous reunification efforts had failed and the record indicated that further efforts would be unavailing C. holding that juvenile court that had never declared child dependent had no jurisdiction to enter order affecting visitation rights of father D. holding that the juvenile court could have concluded that dhr had made reasonable efforts to reunite the father with the child E. holding that juvenile court that determined child was not dependent had no jurisdiction to thereafter determine custody of child

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the juvenile court could have concluded that dhr had made reasonable efforts to reunite the father with the 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of any Security Document is invalid or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, then, to the fullest extent permitted by law, (a) the other provisions of the Security Documents shall remain in full force and effect in such jurisdiction and the Secured Parties in order to carry out the intentions of the parties thereto as nearly as may be possible and (b) the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision in such jurisdiction shall not affect the validity or enforceability thereof in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: CME Guarantor will (a) keep and maintain all property material to the conduct of its business (taken as a whole) in good working order and condition, ordinary wear and tear excepted, and (b) maintain, with financially sound and reputable insurance companies, insurance in such amounts and against such risks as are customarily maintained by companies engaged in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations (it being understood that, to the extent consistent with prudent business practice, a program of self-insurance for first or other loss layers may be utilized), except in the case of (a) or (b) where the failure to do so, individually or in the aggregate, could not reasonably be expected to result in a CME Material Adverse Effect.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All representations and warranties of the Loan Parties contained herein or made in connection herewith shall survive the execution and delivery of this Agreement. All covenants and agreements of the Borrower contained herein relating to the payment of principal, interest, premiums, additional compensation or expenses and indemnification, including those set forth in the Notes, Section 5 [Payments] and Section 11.4 [Expenses; Indemnity; Damage Waiver], shall survive Payment In Full. All other covenants and agreements of the Loan Parties shall continue in full force and effect from and after the date hereof and until Payment In Full.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the [trial] court and both Kovler and the BAA filed briefs. [The trial] [c]ourt heard oral arguments on March 4, 2010. On March 15, 2010, [the trial] [c]ourt entered an Order dismissing Kovler’s appeal and affirming the BAA. Kovler now appeals. (BAA’s Reproduced Record (R.R.) at 29a.) On appeal, Kovler argues that the BAA’s procedures for adjudicating parking violations are unconstitutional because they deny due process. Kovler also argues that the BAA’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence because the original Ticket is not part of the record. We address, first, Kovler’s argument that the BAA’s procedures for adjudicating parking violations contravene due process. Initially, we not 37 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1997); Gardner v. City of Columbus, Ohio, 841 F.2d 1272 (6th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). Kovler’s principal due process argument stems Options: A. holding that a state agencys violations of its own internal regulations did not establish a due process violation or otherwise give rise to a constitutional claim B. holding chicagos system for adjudicating parking violations satisfied due process C. holding california postdeprivation recovery procedures satisfy due process despite lack of notice to claimant of recovery procedures D. holding that philadelphias procedures for adjudicating parking violations satisfy the due process requirements of both the united states and the pennsylvania constitutions E. holding columbuss procedures for adjudicating parking violations did not contravene due process

assistant: The best answer is E. holding columbuss procedures for adjudicating parking violations did not contravene due process
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: 935 (Colo.2004) (en banc) (rejecting Remmer’s automatic presumption of prejudice and, instead, adopting an objective test that “eschews rebuttable presumptions that are conclusive in effect” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); State v. Harris, 181 N.J. 391, 859 A.2d 364, 432 (2004) (“Remmer created a prophylactic rule whose purpose was to protect the impartiality of the jury. It does not follow that any deviation from its suggested measures constitutes a violation of a defendant’s right to an impartial jury. If that right remains protected, the alleged violation is harmless.”). We take d to be prejudicial — only extraneous material that relates to the case being tried is sufficient to invoke the presumption. State v. Rivera, 1997-NMCA-102, ¶ 12, 124 N.M. 211, 947 P.2d 168 (<HOLDING>); see also State v. Jojola, 2006-NMSC-048, ¶ 6, Options: A. holding that a communication between the judge and juror which is unrelated to the case being tried is not improper and prejudicial B. holding that extraneous information which is unrelated to the case being tried is not prejudicial C. holding that information disclosed to jurors as a result of their presence at trial ie that the defendant did not testify did not constitute extraneous prejudicial information within the meaning of the rule 606b exception D. holding that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a violation of the fcra based on extraneous information where it was alleged that the document included broad language regarding disclosure of the information the accuracy of the information the consequences of providing a false statement and the effect of a photocopy E. holding that defendant has constitutional right to be tried by impartial jury unprejudiced by extraneous influence

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that extraneous information which is unrelated to the case being tried is not prejudicial
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: States v. Honken, 184 F.3d 961, 968-69 (8th Cir.1999) (citing Chapman v. United States, 500 U.S. 453, 454, 111 S.Ct. 1919, 114 L.Ed.2d 524 (1991)). We also construe the term by looking at how it has been interpreted in other sections of the Guidelines. See id. at 969-70. Black’s Law Dictionary defines “victim” as “[t]he person who is the object of a crime or tort, as the victim of a robbery is the person robbed.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1085 (Abr. 6th ed.1990). The term “object” is then defined as the “[e]nd aimed at, the t L.Ed.2d 162 (1992). Drapeau argues that there was no victim because no person or property was injured or damaged. However, an individual need not be harmed, or even knowledgeable of the crime, to be a victim. See United States v. Polk, 118 F.3d 286, 298 (5th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 456, 139 Options: A. holding that irs was bound by plan and bankruptcy codes method of determining amount of nondischargeable claim where irs had filed proof of claim for nondischargeable tax debt B. holding that a decedents tax settlement with the irs did not establish the value of his estates claim against the irs as a matter of law C. holding that irs claim for taxes and claim of debtor against irs for violation of automatic stay did not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence D. holding a 3a12a enhancement applicable to solicitation and attempt to blow up an irs building although the plan was never carried out E. holding that various law enforcement personnel and judges were victims of the crime of making false statements to a government agency for purposes of 3a12a where the defendant made false statements about the officials to the irs causing the irs to investigate the officials certainly had the effect of making these individuals the defendants victims

assistant: The best answer is D. holding a 3a12a enhancement applicable to solicitation and attempt to blow up an irs building although the plan was never carried out
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: Capitalized terms used in this Exhibit A that are not defined in this Exhibit A shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Restricted Stock Unit Agreement to which this Exhibit A is attached (the “ RSU Agreement ”). This Exhibit A shall apply during the period of Employee’s ongoing employment with the Company and, as provided below, during the designated period after such employment ends. This Exhibit A does not modify or relieve Employee from any other restrictive covenants contained in any other agreement between Employee and the Company and any of its affiliates.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company has all requisite corporate or other powers and authority to execute this Agreement and to perform all of its obligations hereunder, and this Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by the Company and constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of the Company, enforceable in accordance with its terms. The execution, delivery and performance by the Company of this Agreement have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate action and do not (i) require any authorization, consent or approval by any governmental department, commission, board, bureau, agency or instrumentality, domestic or foreign; (ii) violate any provision of any law, rule or regulation or of any order, writ, injunction or decree presently in effect, having applicability to the Company or the articles of incorporation or by-laws of the Company; or (iii) result in a breach of or constitute a default under any material indenture, Loan or credit agreement or any other agreement, lease or instrument to which the Company is a party or by which it or its properties may be bound or affected.

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

user: Regardless of any termination of any business relationship between the Parties, the obligations and commitments established by this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This Agreement shall survive indefinitely and shall not be affected by the performance, termination or expiration of any other obligations or agreements between the Disclosing Parties and Receiving Party.

assistant: Yes
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 Guarantor is an Affiliate of Borrower, is the owner of a direct or indirect interest in Borrower and has received, or will receive, direct or indirect benefit from the making of this Guaranty with respect to the Guaranteed Obligations.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall use the proceeds, first, for the acquisition of a 10% interest in Alternative Solutions LLC dba Oasis Medical Cannabis, and expenses related thereto, including related commitment fees up to 10% of the gross proceeds; and thereafter any remaining proceeds may be used for any of the following purpose in the Company’s sole discretion: (i) repaying all or part of the amounts due to FirstFire under the Prior Note, (ii) to pay the cost for patent applications domestically or abroad, (iii) to pursue listing of the Company’s securities on a Canadian stock exchange, and (iv) for general working capital purposes.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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: corrective action. 3/3/17 Am. Compl. ¶¶ 120-30. For these reasons, the court has determined that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate the claims alleged in the March 3, 2017 Amended Complaint. B. Standing. “Standing is [also] a threshold jurisdictional issue.” Myers Investigative & Sec. Servs. v. United States, 275 F.3d 1366, 1369-70 (Fed. Cir. 2002). “The party, invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing the[ ] elements [of standing].” Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 561, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). To establish standing under 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1), a complaint must allege sufficient facts to show that the plaintiff: (1) is an interested party; and (2) was prejudiced by alleged errors in the procurement process. See Myers, 275 F.3d at 1370 (<HOLDING>); see also Labatt Food Serv., Inc. v. United Options: A. holding parties to an exculpatory clause where the parties intent is clear B. holding that standing under 1491b1 is limited to interested parties C. holding that a district courts review of a 6330d appeal is limited to the administrative record and the parties are not entitled to discovery D. holding that the lack of shareholder standing under texas law does not implicate constitutional standing E. holding that standing existed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that standing under 1491b1 is limited to interested parties
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: system expressly state that “[i]nmates may also pursue available remedies in State and Federal court.” 37 Pa.Code § 93.9(b). Even assuming, arguendo, that Paluch’s complaint includes federal claims, to which federal law would apply, Paluch’s “tolling while exhausting” argument is belied by his own evidence, which supports the conclusion that he did not exhaust his administrative remedies. Under Section 1997e(a), an inmate must exhaust the administrative remedies available at the state prison. Williams v. Beard, 482 F.3d 637, 639 (3d Cir.2007). “ ‘[P]roper exhaustion’ [means] that the prisoner must comply with all the administrative requirements and not merely wait until there are no administrative remedies ‘available.’” Id. (citing Spruill v. Gillis, 372 F.3d 218, 234 (3d Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>)). The “administrative remedies available at Options: A. holding that if adequate administrative remedies are available it is improper to seek relief in court before those remedies are exhausted B. holding that a plaintiff may not avoid exhausting the administrative remedies by requesting money damages C. holding that the ftca bars claimants from bringing suit in federal court until they have exhausted their administrative remedies D. holding that a procedural default in exhausting administrative remedies bars relief in federal court E. holding that declaratory judgment was inappropriate where after exhausting administrative remedies a contractor would have to bring separate actions against the state and other parties in state court

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a procedural default in exhausting administrative remedies bars relief in federal court
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’s obligations under this Section 3.01 shall survive the resignation or replacement of the Agent or any assignment of rights by, or the replacement of, a Lender or the L/C Issuer, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all other Obligations.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: contrast to Paulsen, plaintiffs here seek the direct payment of benefits that they claim they are owed under the plans, and that defendants allegedly have in their possession. Consequently, their claims for tortious interference with contract and inducing breach of contract seek to "duplicate, supplement, or supplant" the remedies provided by ERISA. See Dishman v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of America, 269 F.3d 974, 983 (9th Cir.2001) ("Claimants simply cannot obtain relief by dressing up an ERISA benefits claim in the garb of a state law tort"). Consequently, all of plaintiffs’ state law causes of action are preempted to the extent they seek to recover compensation owed under the top hat plans. See Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran, 536 U.S. 355, 375, 122 S.Ct. 2151, 153 L.Ed.2d 375 (2002) (<HOLDING>). D. Whether Plaintiff’s Complaint States a Options: A. holding that erisas preemption of state contract claims in a benefitsdue action is an affirmative defense subject to waiver B. recognizing that a court must balance the policy in favor of hearing a litigants claims on the merits with the policy in favor of finality C. holding that erisa preemption is an affirmative defense where erisas preemptive effect would result only in a change of the applicable law and would not subject the claim to exclusive federal jurisdiction D. recognizing that federal preemption is affirmative defense as to which defendant has burden of proof E. recognizing that erisas preemption regime is driven by the overpowering federal policy in favor of federal regulation

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that erisas preemption regime is driven by the overpowering federal policy in favor of federal regulation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any provision which is required to be made part of this Exhibit or the Agreement by virtue of any Legal Requirement is incorporated herein by reference. This Exhibit and the Agreement will be construed in a manner that most favorably facilitates Customer’s compliance with all Legal Requirements.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: women. Schwan’s contends that the portion of Milliren’s charge that she added in February 2009-alleging systemic gender dis crimination — is invalid because it was filed more than 300 days after Milliren resigned, but this argument is premature. As the district court concluded, the appropriate time to address the timeliness issue is if and when an actual lawsuit is filed, not during the subpoena enforcement stage. Accord EEOC v. Tempel Steel Co., 814 F.2d 482, 485 (7th Cir.1987) (rejecting the argument of untimeliness because “[i]f every possible defense, procedural or substantive, were litigated at the subpoena enforcement stage, administrative investigations obviously would be subjected to great delay”); EEOC v. Children’s Hosp. Med. Ctr., 719 F.2d 1426, 1429 (9th Cir.1983) (en banc) (<HOLDING>), abrogated on other grounds by Gilmer v. Options: A. holding that an original eeoc charge is sufficient to support a civil suit under the act for any discrimination developed in the course of a reasonable investigation of that charge provided such discrimination was included in the reasonable cause determination of the eeoc B. holding that plaintiff stated a discrimination claim despite not including a discrimination heading in eeoc complaint because the facts included in eeoc complaint were sufficient to trigger an investigation into whether plaintiff suffered an adverse action because of his religion C. holding that general employment practices are relevant to eeoc investigation of individual disparate treatment claim D. holding that a valid defense to a subsequent lawsuit does not prevent an eeoc investigation E. holding that statements made to internal investigator of employer were made in an investigation under this subchapter where investigation was pursuant to a charge filed with eeoc

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a valid defense to a subsequent lawsuit does not prevent an eeoc investigation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall (a) by 6:00 p.m. (New York City time) on the date hereof, issue a press release disclosing the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereby as permitted by the Securities Act, and (b) file a Current Report on Form 8-K, including the Transaction Documents as exhibits thereto, with the Commission within the time required by the Exchange Act. The Company and each Purchaser shall consult with each other in issuing any other press releases with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby, and neither the Company nor any Purchaser shall issue any such press release nor otherwise make any such public statement without the prior consent of the Company, with respect to any press release of any Purchaser, or without the prior consent of each Purchaser, with respect to any press release of the Company, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, except if such disclosure is required by law, in which case the disclosing party shall promptly provide the other party with prior notice of such public statement or communication. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company shall not publicly disclose the name of any Purchaser, or include the name of any Purchaser in any filing with the Commission or any regulatory agency or the NYSE MKT, without the prior written consent of such Purchaser, except (a) as required by federal securities law in connection with the filing of final Transaction Documents with the Commission and (b) to the extent such disclosure is required by other law or regulations, in which case the Company shall provide the Purchasers with prior notice of such disclosure permitted under this clause (b).

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 382 U.S. 36 86 S.Ct. 151 15 L.Ed.2d 30 Otis JAMESv.STATE OF LOUISIANA. No. 23, Misc. Oct. 18, 1965. G. Wray Gill, Sr., for petitioner. Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen. of Louisiana, M. E. Culligan, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Jim Garrison, for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner was convicted by a Louisiana jury of possession of narcotics and was sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years. The Supreme Court of Louisiana set aside the conviction on the ground that it was based upon evidence seized without a warrant during an illegal search. 246 La. 1033, 169 So.2d 89. Upon rehearing, however, that court affirmed the conviction by a divided vote. 246 La. 1053, 169 So.2d 97. We grant the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for certiorari and reverse the judgment. 2 Police officers arrested the petitioner near the intersection of Camp Street and Jackson Avenue in the City of New Orleans, after he had alighted from an automobile driven by another man. The officers then drove the petitioner to his home, more than two blocks away. They broke open the door and for several hours conducted an intensive search which finally yielded the narcotics equipment and single morphine tablet that constituted the basis of the petitioner's subsequent conviction. 3 The Supreme Court of Louisiana found that the officers had probable cause to arrest the petitioner at the time they apprehended him, and the validity of his arrest is not here in issue. In the circumstances of this case, however, the subsequent search of the petitioner's home cannot be regarded as incident to his arrest on a street corner more than two blocks away. A search 'can be incident to an arrest only if it is substantially contemporaneous with the arrest and is confined to the immediate vicinity of the arrest.' Stoner v. State of California, 376 U.S. 483, 486, 84 S.Ct. 889, 891, 11 L.Ed.2d 856. See also Preston v. United States, 376 U.S. 364, 84 S.Ct. 881, 11 L.Ed.2d 777. 4 Under the doctrine of Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081, see also Ker v. State of California, 374 U.S. 23, 83 S.Ct. 1623, 10 L.Ed.2d 726, it was constitutional error to admit the fruits of this illegal search into evidence at the petitioner's trial. Accordingly, the petition for certiorari is granted, the judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Louisiana for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. 5 It is so ordered. 6 Petition for certiorari granted, judgment reversed, and case remanded for further proceedings.

assistant: 1
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 VCAA and preceded the promulgation of the August 29, 2001, regulations. Matlock v. Principi, 16 Vet.App. 188, 189 (per curiam order) (2002). Although the Court has been faithful to its caselaw here by considering the appellant’s contention for reversal, it has, once more, proceeded prematurely in deciding this case without appropriate briefing by the parties as to the applicability of the VCAA or the effect of the issuance of the August 29, 2001, regulations in view of the Federal Circuit’s opinions in Bernklau and Dyment, both supra, and of this Court’s opinions in Holliday and/or Kar-nas, both supra. 1 . 66 Fed.Reg. 45,620, 45,630-32 (Aug. 29, 2001) ("Duty to Assist” regulations, amending 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156, 3.159, 3.326). 2 . See Holliday v. Principi, 14 Vet.App. 280, 285 (<HOLDING>), mot. for recons, denied, 14 Vet.App. 327 (per Options: A. holding all sections of vcaa retroactive B. recognizing that aedpa would not apply to a habeas petition that was pending at the time of its enactment C. holding inter alia that all provisions of vcaa were retroactively applicable to claims pending at time of enactment of vcaa D. holding that the fair sentencing act does not apply retroactively to defendants whose criminal conduct occurred before its enactment even if those defendants were sentenced after its enactment E. holding all sections of vcaa are retroactive

assistant: The best answer is C. holding inter alia that all provisions of vcaa were retroactively applicable to claims pending at time of enactment of vcaa
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 court stated: [T]his argument-ignores the explicit language- of the [“charge” exception]. There is no dispute that the [National Park Service], which operates Fort Jefferson, does not charge a fee for entry into the Park. The fact that licensing fees are charged to boat and seaplane charter operators or that fees are charged by private taxi services for transportation purposes does not change the fact that no charge is made for entering or using the park area. Id. at 1582; see also Carlton v. Cleburne County, 93 F.3d 505, 510 (8th Cir.1996) (“Because there was no entrance fee, or any other fee of any kind, paid in the instant case, we conclude the ‘charge’ exception to [Arkansas’s recreational use statute] does not apply.”); Wilson v. United States, 989 F.2d 953, 957 (8th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Kirkland v. United States, 930 F.Supp. 1443, Options: A. holding that animal husbandry operations were included in the definition of farm even if the animals do not touch the ground graze on the land or feed from crops grown on the land and holding that land used to support buildings used in the production of agricultural products is a productive use of the land B. holding that land sales contracts were not securities because they involved no investment in an enterprise even if land was bought on expectation that development of the area would increase the value of the land C. holding that a cause of action for damages to property resulting from a permanent nuisance accrues to the owner of the land at the time the injury begins to affect the land and mere transfer of the land by deed does not transfer the claim for damages D. holding where exempt organization was in possession of real property under land contract obligating organization to pay the purchase price and use land for exempt purpose the association was the owner of the land within the meaning of the statute E. holding that 2 per personper night fee paid by boy scout troop to spend the night at army military post was not a charge to enter onto the land or for use of the land and therefore did not fall within the charge exception

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that 2 per personper night fee paid by boy scout troop to spend the night at army military post was not a charge to enter onto the land or for use of the land and therefore did not fall within the charge exception
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 not be assigned by the Company (whether by operation of law or otherwise) without the prior written consent of the Required Purchasers, provided, however, that in the event that the Company is a party to a merger, consolidation, share exchange or similar business combination transaction in which the Common Stock is converted into the equity securities of another Person, from and after the effective time of such transaction, such Person shall, by virtue of such transaction, be deemed to have assumed the obligations of the Company hereunder, the term “Company” shall be deemed to refer to such Person and the term “Registrable Securities” shall be deemed to include the securities received by the Purchasers in connection with such transaction unless such securities are otherwise freely tradable by the Purchasers after giving effect to such transaction.

assistant: Assignments
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: need not be treated as an •element required to be found by the jury suggests that the same fact need not be treated as an element that is required to be alleged in the charging instrument. See Harris, 536 U.S. at 568, 122 S.Ct. 2406 (stating that factor increasing a defendant’s minimum sentence “need not be alleged in the indictment, submitted to the jury, or proved beyond a reasonable doubt”). The symmetry between charging and fact finding suggested by Apprendi has not been universally embraced. Some courts have concluded that the notice guarantee of the Sixth Amendment may be satisfied with respect to a fact that is an element under Apprendi by means other than an allegation in the charging instrument. See, e.g., State v. Nichols, 201 Ariz. 234, 33 P.3d 1172, 1176 (Ariz.Ct.App.2001) (<HOLDING>). But other courts have followed the line of Options: A. holding that notice to the attorney of record constitutes notice to the petitioner B. holding that alien need not receive actual notice for due process requirements to be satisfied C. holding that facts related to commission of offense necessary to establish eligibility for enhanced penalty of life imprisonment need not be alleged in the charging document provided that the notice of them given to the defendant comports with arizonas traditional notice requirements for alleging sentence enhancements D. holding that the notice afforded by a document determines its sufficiency as a notice of appeal E. holding that an indictment charging one offense during the commission of another crime need not allege the elements of the latter offense

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that facts related to commission of offense necessary to establish eligibility for enhanced penalty of life imprisonment need not be alleged in the charging document provided that the notice of them given to the defendant comports with arizonas traditional notice requirements for alleging sentence enhancements
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company acknowledges that a breach by it of its obligations hereunder will cause irreparable harm to Investor by vitiating the intent and purpose of the transaction contemplated hereby. Accordingly, the Company acknowledges that the remedy at law for a breach of its obligations under this Agreement will be inadequate and agrees, in the event of a breach or threatened breach by the Company of the provisions of this Agreement, that Investor shall be entitled, in addition to all other available remedies at law or in equity, and in addition to the penalties assessable herein, to an injunction or injunctions restraining, preventing or curing any breach of this Agreement and to enforce specifically the terms and provisions hereof, without the necessity of showing economic loss and without any bond or other security being required.

assistant: Remedies
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: subject to the exclusions in the policy”). Accordingly, an additional insured not only reaps the benefits of the insured’s policy, but it also bears the burden of the exclusions. It is further our view that, if the insurer intended to exclude indemnification agreements within insured contracts from the substantial restriction on coverage that the On-Premises Endorsement constitutes, the policy would have expressly so stated. See Maroney v. New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 5 N.Y.3d 467, 805 N.Y.S.2d 533, 839 N.E.2d 886, 889 (2005) (stating that “[i]f the insurer intended to limit [an] exclusion * * * it could have done so explicitly, as it does in the very same policy’s * * * provisions”); see also Chimbay v. AvalonBay Communities, Inc., 742 F.Supp.2d 265, 283 (E.D.N.Y.2008) (<HOLDING>). The policy at issue in the instant case does Options: A. holding a personal profit exclusion applicable to an insured corporation where the purpose of the exclusion was to exclude coverage when the insured received profits to which the insured was not legally entitled B. holding that if an insurer intended to exclude insured contracts from the provision denying coverage for injuries to employees it could have expressly stated as such C. holding that if an insurer denies coverage based on an assertion that the underlying claim is excluded from coverage there is a presumption that the insurer did not suffer prejudice because prompt notice would have merely resulted in an earlier denial of coverage D. holding that insured cannot demand reimbursement for defense insurer had no opportunity to control if insured does not promptly notify insurer of facts triggering coverage E. recognizing that a conflict of interest may provide the source of prejudice upon which an insured may rely to estop an insurer from denying coverage

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that if an insurer intended to exclude insured contracts from the provision denying coverage for injuries to employees it could have expressly stated as such
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: seller of a controlled substance does not establish a conspiracy. There was no error. In Mitchell v. State, 363 Md. 130, 767 A.2d 844 (2001), the Court of Appeals summarized the requirements for proof of conspiracy. A criminal conspiracy consists of the combination of two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful purpose, or to accomplish a lawful purpose by unlawful means. The conspiracy may be shown by circumstantial evidence from which a common design may be inferred. To demonstrate that there has been a meeting of the minds — a unity of purpose and design — the State must show that: (1) the parties to the conspiracy gave the matter sufficient thought, however brief or impulsive, to appreciate or articulate the objective of the conspiracy; and (2) the parties, by word or th Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 521 U.S. 1128, 117 S.Ct. 2529, Options: A. holding that defendant charged with conspiracy to manufacture marijuana and possessing marijuana with intent to distribute was not entitled to specific buyerseller instruction even though support for such instruction existed because court gave a complete instruction reciting all the elements of conspiracy B. holding that defendant was not entitled to buyerseller instruction in drug conspiracy prosecution given evidence that defendant played numerous roles in the conspiracy and that massive amounts of cocaine were involved C. holding that the evidence did not plausibly support a buyerseller instruction because overwhelming evidence showed that defendants agreed to import drugs with the intent to distribute them and engaged in repeated transactions of large quantities of narcotic drugs for resale D. holding that trial court did not err in refusing to give instruction that mere buyerseller relationship in single transaction does not alone support a conspiracy conviction where there was evidence of advanced planning among the alleged conspirators to deal in wholesale quantities of drugs obviously not intended for personal use E. holding that defendant was not entitled to buyerseller instruction despite defendants contention that buyerseller transactions were the only contacts between defendant and alleged coconspirator because the government adduced far more evidence than the prior drug purchases to establish the conspiracy and instructions as a whole did not allow jury to convict on mere buyerseller theory

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that defendant was not entitled to buyerseller instruction despite defendants contention that buyerseller transactions were the only contacts between defendant and alleged coconspirator because the government adduced far more evidence than the prior drug purchases to establish the conspiracy and instructions as a whole did not allow jury to convict on mere buyerseller theory
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: court granted the Appellees motion. (Appel-lee’s Appendix at 30). Bah does not point to any designated evidence which had not been stricken to demonstrate what statements she asserts were improperly made by Ruffin to the police. Therefore, based upon the designated evidence, I would conclude that the qualified privilege applies and would affirm on all issues. See Williams, 914 N.E.2d at 769 (finding that whether the defendant’s misperception was speculative, negligent, or even reckless, it was not so obviously mistaken to permit a reasonable inference that he lied, and holding that the trial court did not err in finding a qualified privilege was established as a matter of law and thereby precluding the plaintiffs’ claim for defamation); Kelley v. Tanoos, 865 N.E.2d 593, 602 (Ind.2007) (<HOLDING>). [46] For the foregoing reasons, I Options: A. holding that summary judgment in favor of the defendant was appropriate because the plaintiff failed to designate evidence that demonstrates that the defendant abused the qualified privilege B. holding that the trial court correctly entered summary judgment in favor of defendant and denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment where plaintiff failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that defendant breached its duty to act in good faith C. holding summary judgment appropriate where plaintiff failed to establish product identification D. holding that in a failuretotransfer case if after a full opportunity for discovery the summary judgment record is insufficient to establish the existence of an appropriate position into which the plaintiff could have been transferred summary judgment must be granted in favor of the defendant even if it also appears that the defendant failed to engage in good faith in the interactive process E. holding summary judgment in favor of defendant was appropriate where plaintiff failed to present evidence upon which a reasonable jury could conclude that age was a determinative factor in adverse employment action

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that summary judgment in favor of the defendant was appropriate because the plaintiff failed to designate evidence that demonstrates that the defendant abused the qualified privilege
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 Board is authorized, subject to the provisions of the Plan, to establish, amend, and rescind such rules and regulations as it deems necessary or advisable for the proper administration of the Plan and to take such other action in connection with or in relation to the Plan as it deems necessary or advisable. Each action and determination made or taken pursuant to the Plan by the Board, including any interpretation or construction of the Plan, shall be final and conclusive for all purposes and upon all Persons. No member of the Board shall be liable for any action or determination made or taken by such member or the Board in good faith with respect to the Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties hereto will sign such further documents, cause such meetings to be held, resolutions passed, exercise their votes and do and perform and cause to be done such further acts and things necessary, proper or advisable in order to give full effect to this Agreement and every provision hereof. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Company shall not directly or indirectly take any action that is intended to, or would reasonably be expected to result in, the Stockholders or any Stockholder Entity being deprived of the rights contemplated by this Agreement.

assistant: Further Assurances