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: homestead exemption, even though the title of the property is held by a revocable trust. In the case at hand, Mary is the trustee and one of the beneficiaries of the Mary D. Fitton Revocable Trust. She is also the person who formed the trust. The property in question is her principal place of residence. She was married at all times pertinent to the mortgage and conveyances at issue. Relying on the reasoning in Richardson, and case law from this court relied upon therein, we hold that, according to the facts presented, Mary Fitton was entitled to a homestead exemption even though the title to the property was held by her trust. Furthermore, the fact that the trust holds the property as a tenant in common does not affect the outcome. See Simpson v. Biffle, 63 Ark. 289, 38 S.W. 345 (1896) (<HOLDING>). As for the Bank of Little Rock’s argument Options: A. holding that when a husband first acquired property and then conveyed it to his wife they could not hold the property as tenants by the entirety or joint tenants because the four unities did not coincide so the deed created a tenancy in common with a right of survivorship B. holding that the property held by the revocable trust in which the trustee was the beneficiary and the property was his permanent residence was a constitutionally protected homestead property C. holding that regardless of whether the property was held as tenants in common or by the entirety the husband was entitled to hold property as a homestead D. holding that marital property was not attachable for the sole debts of the husband because it was held in tenancy by entirety E. holding that property held by husband and wife in tenancy by entirety is exempt from attachment or execution for the sole debts of husband

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that regardless of whether the property was held as tenants in common or by the entirety the husband was entitled to hold property as a homestead
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice required to be given hereunder to the Company shall be in writing addressed to the Company, attention Senior Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer, One CVS Drive, Woonsocket, RI 02895, and any notice required to be given hereunder to Participant shall be addressed to Participant at his address as shown on the records of the Company, subject to the right of either party hereafter to designate in writing to the other some other address.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 127 S. Ct. 2245 (2007) Mario CLAIBORNE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES. No. 06-5618. Supreme Court of United States. June 4, 2007. Lee T. Lawless, Federal Public Defender, Michael Dwyer, Assistant Public Defender, Counsel of Record, David Hemingway, Research & Writing Attorney, St. Louis, MO, for Petitioner. Paul D. Clement, Solicitor General, Counsel of Record, Alice S. Fisher, Assistant Attorney General, Michael R. Dreeben, Deputy Solicitor General, Dan Himmelfarb, Matthew D. Roberts, Assistants to the Solicitor General, Nina Goodman, Jeffrey P. Singdahlsen, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. PER CURIAM. The Court is advised that the petitioner died in St. Louis, Missouri, on May 30, 2007. The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is therefore vacated as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 71 S. Ct. 104, 95 L. Ed. 36 (1950). It is so ordered.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: rather than a “final conviction.” The elements of the offense of felony evading arrest under section 38.04(a), (b)(2) are: (1) the actor intentionally fled from a person he knew was a peace officer attempting to lawfully arrest him; (2) the actor used a vehicle in fleeing from the officer; and (3) the actor had been previously convicted under section 38.04. Id. § 38.04(a), (b)(2)(A). The language in section 38.04(b)(2) that makes the offense of evading arrest a third degree felony is presented as an element of the felony offense itself, rather than as an enhancement provision, such as can be found in section 12.42 of the penal code. See id. § 12.42 (providing penalties for repeat and habitual felony offenders); State v. Atwood, 16 S.W.3d 192, 196 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 2000, pet. refd) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added). Throneberry argues the Options: A. holding that no offense alleged where affidavit described offense as felony B. holding that resisting arrest is lesser offense of assault on an officer C. holding a prior offense of evading arrest is an element of the offense of felony evading arrest D. holding that employees convictions for burglary possession of controlled substance public intoxication possession of marijuana unlawful carrying of weapon and evading arrest did not make his sexual assault of child foreseeable E. holding that when an arrest is properly supported by probable cause as to any offense neither the officers subjective reliance on an offense for which no probable cause exists nor his verbal announcement of the wrong offense vitiates the arrest

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a prior offense of evading arrest is an element of the offense of felony evading arrest
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: as negativing the hypothesis of an intervening cause beyond the defendant’s control, and also as tending to show affirmatively that the cause was one within the power of the defendant to prevent by the exercise of care. Thus it has been held that the inference is not permissible where ... the opportunity for interference by others weakens the probability that the injury is attributable to the defendant’s act or omission.” (Citations omitted). Lee v. Housing Auth. of Baltimore, 203 Md. 453, 462, 101 A.2d 832, 836 (1954). This Court has often held res ipsa to be inapplicable when the opportunity for third-party interference prevented a finding that the defendant maintained exclusive control of the injury-causing instrumentality. See, e.g., Joffre, 222 Md. at 8-10, 158 A.2d at 635-36 (<HOLDING>); Williams v. McCrory Stores Corp., 203 Md. Options: A. holding defendants control not exclusive where customers had access to selfservice washing machines B. holding defendants control not exclusive where customers had access to soda bottles for approximately two months before one bottle inexplicably shattered C. holding that the total denial of all access to the law library for seven months violated the plaintiffs constitutional right of access to the courts D. holding defendants control not exclusive where thousands of customers had access to revolving stools every week E. holding authority to control limits duty to control

assistant: The best answer is B. holding defendants control not exclusive where customers had access to soda bottles for approximately two months before one bottle inexplicably shattered
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: (1) The Equipment Supply Agreement shall terminate or shall be declared null and void (except upon fulfillment of such party’s obligations thereunder or the scheduled expiration of the term of the Equipment Supply Agreement), or (2) any provision in the Equipment Supply Agreement shall for any reason cease to be valid and binding on any party thereto (other than Borrower), other than, in the case of clause (2) above, (x) any such failure to be valid and binding that could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect or (y) to the extent that such provision is restored or replaced by a replacement provision in form and substance reasonably acceptable to Administrative Agent within a ten-day period thereafter.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 670 (quoting verbatim the test outlined in Town of Burlington). An entity need not strictly conform to each factor. Instead, “[a]ll relevant factors are to be considered cumulatively, with no single factor being essential or conclusive.” Ry. Labor Executives’ Ass’n v. Consol. Rail Corp., 580 F.Supp. 777, 778 (D.D.C.1984). 1. Performing a Governmental Function [¶ 24] The investigatory panel organized by the Attorney General was clearly performing a traditional government function-the internal investigation of allegations of prosecutorial and law enforcement misconduct. The fact that an investigation is conducted through an outside source does not necessarily change the public nature of the investigation. See Cyr v. Madawaska Sch. Dep’t, 2007 ME 28, ¶¶ 3-4, 12, 916 A.2d 967, 969, 971 (<HOLDING>); Lewiston Daily Sun, Inc. v. City of Auburn, Options: A. holding that an outside investigation of a school matter did not make portions of the resulting report any less a confidential employee evaluation B. holding that the burden of proving that the employee did not make reasonable efforts is on the defendant C. holding that records of students evaluation by school psychologist were not subject to the psychologistpatient privilege because the student and his mother did not expect the communications to remain confidential and because the purpose of the interview was to assess the students need for special education services not for the purpose of treatment or counseling D. holding that the judge of compensation claims erred by not requiring the employer and carrier to pay for an evaluation to determine the etiology of claimants medical problem and that it is the purpose of the evaluation not its result that determines its compensability E. holding search was conducted by school official where school resource officer did not search the bag himself or conduct any investigation on his own and therefore applying the tlo reasonableness standard

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an outside investigation of a school matter did not make portions of the resulting report any less a confidential employee evaluation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower shall have delivered to Bank evidence of insurance coverage, in form, substance, amounts, covering risks and issued by companies satisfactory to Bank, and where required by Bank, with lender loss payable endorsements in favor of Bank.

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: By accepting the Award, Employee specifically agrees to the restrictive covenants contained in this Section 5 (the “Restrictive Covenants”) and Employee agrees that the Restrictive Covenants and the remedies described below are reasonable and necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the Company Group.

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: particularity, Plaintiffs may include a claim for unjust enrichment under California law as well as the laws of the other states. In a recent decision, which the Court believes is worth quoting at length, the Northern District of California summarized the competing approaches to unjust enrichment and explained that the two approaches do not necessarily conflict: Decisions in both this federal district as well as in California state courts diverge on the proper way to conceptualize unjust enrichment. The differences center on the availability of the unjust enrichment theory as an independent claim for relief. Sometimes, courts read a plaintiffs claim for unjust enrichment as a cause of action. See, e.g., Ghirardo v. Antonioli, 14 Cal.4th 39, 50, 57 Cal.Rptr.2d 687, 924 P.2d 996 (1996) (<HOLDING>). As such, these courts focus on whether the Options: A. holding that there is no cause of action in california for unjust enrichment B. recognizing that a plaintiff may advance a standalone claim for unjust enrichment particularly where he or she seeks restitution and other remedies are inadequate C. holding that a plaintiff could not proceed on her procedural due process claim brought under 1983 because she did not show that she had exhausted her state law remedies or alleged that those remedies were inadequate D. holding that cause of action for unjust enrichment accrues upon payment of sum giving rise to duty of restitution E. holding that where an express contract was in place between plaintiff and defendant that governed the compensation sought by plaintiff plaintiff may not recover under a theory of unjust enrichment

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that a plaintiff may advance a standalone claim for unjust enrichment particularly where he or she seeks restitution and other remedies are inadequate
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: During the “Term” (as defined in Section 3 below), the Company will pay to Executive a base salary at a rate of $450,000 per annum, which may be reviewed and increased (but not decreased) from time to time in the normal course of business (such annual salary, as in effect from time to time, to be referred to herein as “ Base Salary ”). Executive’s Base Salary will be payable in accordance with InvenTrust’s normal payroll practices prior to a Triggering Event and the Company’s normal payroll practices following a Triggering Event.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a. Blackwell Has Alleged a Disability Within the Meaning of the ADA Blackwell must first allege that he has a “disability” within the meaning of the ADA. Swanks, 179 F.3d at 934. The ADA defines a disability as “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of [an] individual.” 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1). “The operation of a major bodily function, including ... circulatory ... functions,” is a “major life activity.” Id. § 12102(2)(B). And according to EEOC regulations, the term “substantially limits” is to be “construed broadly in favor of expansive coverage.” 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2; see also 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4)(B)-(E) (generally defining a broad scope for the term “substantially limits”); Green v. American Univ., 647 F.Supp.2d 21, 29 (D.D.C.2009) (<HOLDING>); Johnson v. District of Columbia, 572 Options: A. holding that breathing is a major life activity within the contemplation of the ada B. recognizing sleeping as major life activity C. holding plaintiff with carpal tunnel syndrome who could not perform heavy lifting failed to meet burden of establishing substantial limitation in major life activity of work D. holding that an individual with a condition similar to irritable bowel syndrome pleaded a disability because the functioning of the bowels is a major life activity E. holding that reproduction is not a major life activity

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an individual with a condition similar to irritable bowel syndrome pleaded a disability because the functioning of the bowels is a major life 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: Each Guarantor agrees that it will from time to time, at the request of the Administrative Agent, do all such things and execute all such documents as the Administrative Agent may consider necessary or desirable to give full effect to this Guaranty and to perfect and preserve the rights and powers of the Secured Parties hereunder. Each Guarantor acknowledges and confirms that such Guarantor itself has established its own adequate means of obtaining from each Company on a continuing basis all information desired by such Guarantor concerning the financial condition of each Company and that such Guarantor will look to each Company and not to the Administrative Agent or any other Secured Party in order for such Guarantor to keep adequately informed of changes in any Company’s financial condition.

assistant: Further Assurances
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: Key associates and officers eligible for participation in the Plan will be determined by the Compensation Committee on an annual basis. Executive officers eligible to receive Awards under the Executive Award Feature of the Plan will be identified each year by the Compensation Committee as described in Section 11 below.

assistant: Participations
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: Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of (i) material acquisitions or dispositions during any EBITDA Performance Period or (ii) currency fluctuations affecting U.S. dollar denominated Adjusted Corporate EBITDA by 5% or more from January 1, 2016 through the end of the applicable EBITDA Performance Period, the performance incentive threshold criteria, if and as applicable, and/or the determination of Corporate EBITDA, shall be adjusted in an equitable and proportionate manner as determined by the Committee and in accordance with any applicable provisions of the Plan; provided , further , in the event of any other extraordinary transactions and items during any EBITDA Performance Period, such criteria and/or the Corporate EBITDA determination may be adjusted by the Committee in accordance with any applicable provisions of the Plan.

assistant: Adjustments
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 termination of the Agreement shall not affect any Loan Party’s, Agent’s or any Lender’s rights, or any of the Obligations having their inception prior to the effective date of such termination, and the provisions hereof shall continue to be fully operative until all transactions entered into, rights or interests created or Obligations have been fully and indefeasibly paid, disposed of, concluded or liquidated. The security interests, Liens and rights granted to Agent and Lenders hereunder and the financing statements filed hereunder shall continue in full force and effect, notwithstanding the termination of this Agreement or the fact that Borrowers’ Account may from time to time be temporarily in a zero or credit position, until all of the Obligations of each Borrower have been indefeasibly paid and performed in full after the termination of this Agreement or each Borrower has furnished Agent and Lenders with an indemnification satisfactory to Agent and Lenders with respect thereto. Accordingly, each Loan Party waives any rights which it may have under the Uniform Commercial Code to demand the filing of termination statements with respect to the Collateral, and Agent shall not be required to send such termination statements to the Loan Parties, or to file them with any filing office, unless and until this Agreement shall have been terminated in accordance with its terms and all Obligations have been indefeasibly paid in full in immediately available funds. All representations, warranties, covenants, waivers and agreements contained herein shall survive termination hereof until all Obligations are indefeasibly paid and performed in full.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Borrower shall promptly commence construction of the Improvements in accordance with the terms and provisions of this Loan Agreement and will pursue the same in good faith with diligence and continuity in accordance with the Plans and Specifications.

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: search, Dahl located several items in the trunk that he recognized as commonly used in the manufacture of methamphetamine. Those items were located in the same area where the backpack was found. When he found the backpack, Dahl had already located the book on chemicals on the floor in the passenger area where defendant had been sitting, and he had also found contraband in defendant’s fanny pack. When Dahl discovered the contraband visible in the trunk of the car, he contacted the narcotics team to continue the search because of his concern about the hazardous nature of methamphetamine production. He then went into the store to arrest defendant and Johnson. The foregoing facts, taken together, support an inference that Dahl and the other searching officers subjectively b 888 (1991) (<HOLDING>). Of course, probable cause alone is not Options: A. holding that a defendants conviction for two possession of marijuana counts could not be supported by his possession of two marijuana cigarettes dropped from his hand and again for his possession of several packets of marijuana found in a nearby jacket during the same search B. holding that officers had objective probable cause to search the pocket of a jacket found on the seat of the defendants truck where the discovery of marijuana in two different locations in the truck combined with the defendants possession of marijuana reasonably led officers to believe that other caches would be found elsewhere in the vehicle C. holding that the odor of marijuana gave officers probable cause to believe members of a group possessed marijuana and therefore a search of each person present was proper D. recognizing without inquiring whether the officers would necessarily have arrested the defendant that the discovery of the marijuana in the van provided probable cause to arrest the defendant and upon arrest the officers unquestionably would have searched the defendant and discovered the marijuana in his pocket E. holding that the arresting officer lacked probable cause to arrest defendant a rear seat passenger of a car for possession of marijuana based on the discovery of two marijuana seeds in the front of the vehicle

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that officers had objective probable cause to search the pocket of a jacket found on the seat of the defendants truck where the discovery of marijuana in two different locations in the truck combined with the defendants possession of marijuana reasonably led officers to believe that other caches would be found elsewhere in the vehicle
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No failure to exercise and no delay in exercising on the part of any Party, of any right, remedy, power or privilege hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof; nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right, remedy, power or privilege hereunder preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, remedy, power or privilege. The rights, remedies, powers and privileges herein provided are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights, remedies, powers and privileges provided by Applicable Law. The failure of the Noteholder to exercise any such right or remedy shall in no event be construed as a waiver or release of any such right or remedy.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with respect to this aspect of Wilkinson's claims, nor could they have done so successfully. The defendant URI has long been held amenable to suit. See University of Rhode Island v. A.W. Chesterton Co., 2 F.3d 1200 (1st Cir.1993) and Vanlaarhoven v. Newman, 564 F.Supp. 145 (D.R.I.1983) (both holding that URI is not an alter ego of the state, and thus it cannot invoke the defense of sovereign immunity). Moreover, even assuming arguendo that the commission would qualify as an arm or an alter ego of the state, it could not avoid a claim seeking to vindicate a protected property interest in statutory employment benefits by invoking the doctrine of sovereign immunity. See, e.g., R.I. Const. art. 1, sec. 16; see also Pellegrino v. The Rhode Island Ethics Commission, 788 A.2d 1119 (R.I.202) (<HOLDING>). 15 . The memoranda included (1) a memorandum Options: A. holding that state sovereign immunity bars state constitutional claims B. holding that the united states is liable for interest only in the event of a clear statutory waiver of sovereign immunity C. holding that a state may waive its sovereign immunity D. holding that 28 usc 1331 does not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity E. holding that sovereign immunity does not protect the state from claims for statutory employment benefits that constitute a protected property interest

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that sovereign immunity does not protect the state from claims for statutory employment benefits that constitute a protected property interest
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: % discount. Thus, any discount under this agreement could not have applied based on these circumstances. 8 . Additionally, we note that during the February 9, 2006 oral argument before the District Court, Allshore, Inc. acknowledged that it was a proper party. Indeed, Allshore, Inc. noted that the only question with respect to its liability was whether the statute of limitations against it as an entity expired before Hahne-mann filed suit. 9 . We note that this is the only issue Appellants raise on appeal with respect to the District Court’s award of costs. Therefore, we decline to address the issue of the award of Court costs to the extent that some of these costs might have fallen outside of 28 U.S.C. § 1920. See, e.g., Agredano v. Mut. of Omaha Cos., 75 F.3d 541, 544 (9th Cir.1996)(<HOLDING>) (citation omitted); see also, Anderson v. Unum Options: A. holding that a party can recover costs under either dnmlrciv 542 or 28 usc 1920 B. holding that section 1132gls allowance for costs of action empowers courts to award only the types of costs allowed by 28 usc 1920 and only in the amounts allowed by section 1920 itself by 28 usc 1821 or by similar such provisions C. recognizing the supreme courts precept that district courts may decline to tax costs enumerated in 1920 but cannot award costs not enumerated under 1920 citing crawford fitting 482 us at 44245107 sct 2494 D. holding that 1920 does not authorize taxing mediation fees as costs E. holding that where jurisdiction was based on 28 usc 2201 venue was determined as per 28 usc 1391

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that section 1132gls allowance for costs of action empowers courts to award only the types of costs allowed by 28 usc 1920 and only in the amounts allowed by section 1920 itself by 28 usc 1821 or by similar such provisions
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: 80B component of the complaint and on December 21, after a hearing, resolved the Rule 80B appeal by affirming the action of the City. [¶ 6] Three days later, on December 24, the City filed its first motion to dismiss, arguing that Baker’s Table’s failure to file a motion to specify the future course of proceedings as required under M.R. Civ. P. 80B(i) required dismissal. The City followed this on January 8, 1999, with a second motion to dismiss for failure to file a motion requesting a trial of the facts pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80B(d). On January 19, the court docketed its expedited pretrial order, addressing th to certain subsidiary issues that, although not independent claims, nevertheless involve facts which are not in the record. See Boisvert v. King, 618 A.2d 211, 214 (Me.1992) (<HOLDING>). [¶ 10] Here, because there were no facts Options: A. holding that an issue was not properly before the court on appeal because the trial court did not have the opportunity to make any findings of fact regarding it B. holding that timeliness of filing of notice of appeal is a jurisdictional issue C. holding that an issue is preserved for appeal where the issue was sufficiently raised for the court to rule on it D. holding a trial of the facts was required on a rule 80bd motion where there was an issue regarding the timeliness of an appeal E. holding that where plaintiff fails to raise issue of timeliness of departments hearing at administrative level the issue is waived on appeal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding a trial of the facts was required on a rule 80bd motion where there was an issue regarding the timeliness of an appeal
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: automatically renewed for successive one-year terms, unless either party gave sixty days’ notice of termination or ninety days’ notice of intent to renegotiate. The contract further provided that, during its term, the county and each city which approved the contract agreed not to contract with “any other individual or firm to provide solid waste removal from residential premises in any [cjity.” Appellees’ App. at 139. Mr. Umbehr hauled trash for six of the seven cities in the county from 1985 until the county terminated the contract in 1991. In other words, the contract was automatically renewed each year, according to its terms. Throughout this time period, Mr. Umbe 02 (6th Cir.), vacated, 882 F.2d 207 (6th Cir.1989), reinstated in pertinent part, 924 F.2d 627 (6th Cir.1991) (en banc) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1250, 111 S.Ct. 2889, Options: A. holding that it was not clearly established that independent contractor claiming denial of public contract because of political affiliation was protected under first amendment B. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract in retaliation for petition was not protected by first amendment C. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract because of lobbying and other political activities not protected by first amendment D. holding that first amendment prohibits government officials from discharging or threatening to discharge lowerlevel public employees based on their political affiliation E. holding that independent contractor claiming removal from city towing rotation list because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it was not clearly established that independent contractor claiming denial of public contract because of political affiliation was protected under first amendment
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: Seller and its Subsidiaries have timely filed all tax returns that are required to be filed by them and have timely paid all Taxes due, except for any such Taxes as are being appropriately contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings diligently conducted and with respect to which is has established adequate reserves. There are no Liens for Taxes, except for statutory liens for Taxes not yet due and payable.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 391 U.S. 462 88 S.Ct. 1716 20 L.Ed.2d 741 David RABECKv.NEW YORK. No. 611. May 27, 1968. Stanley Fleishman, Osmond K. Fraenkel and Sam Rosenwein, for appellant. Isidore Dollinger and Daniel J. Sullivan, for appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 Appellant, in seeking reversal of his conviction for selling 'girlie' magazines to a minor under 18 years of age in violation of former § 484—i, New York Penal Law, Consol.Laws, c. 40,* argues among other grounds that the statute is impermissibly vague. We agree. While we rejected a like claim as to § 484—h in Ginsberg v. State of New York, 390 U.S. 629, 88 S.Ct. 1274, 20 L.Ed.2d 195, § 484—i in part prohibited the sale of 'any * * * magazines * * * which would appeal to the lust of persons under the age of eighteen years or to their curiosity as to sex or to the anatomical differences between the sexes * * *.' That standard in our view is unconstitutionally vague. 'Nor is it an answer to an argument that a particular regulation of expression is vague to say that it was adopted for the salutary purpose of protecting children. The permissible extent of vagueness is not directly proportional to, or a function of, the extent of the power to regulate or control expression with respect to children.' Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 390 U.S. 676, 689, 88 S.Ct. 1298, 1306, 20 L.Ed.2d 225. 2 Reversed. 3 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, with whom Mr. Justice BLACK concurs, would reverse for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Ginsberg v. State of New York, 390 U.S. 629, 650, 88 S.Ct. 1274, 1286. 4 Mr. Justice HARLAN would affirm the judgment of the state court on the premises stated in his separate opinion in Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 390 U.S. 676, 704, 88 S.Ct. 1298, 1313. In addition, he considers it a particularly fruitless judicial act to strike down on the score of vagueness a state statute which has already been repealed. * Section 484—i was repealed by N.Y.Laws 1967, c. 791. See Ginsberg v. State of New York, 390 U.S. 629, 631—632, 88 S.Ct. 1274, 1276, n. 1.

assistant: 3
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: 85198, 2005 WL 1484025, at *7 (Ohio Ct.App. June 23, 2005) (same). Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff fails to state an independent claim for breach of contract separate from its claim for default on the Notes. The Amended Complaint reflects that Plaintiffs breach of contract claim is based on the same operative facts as its default claim. Specifically, the pleadings make clear that both causes of action are attempting to enforce the Notes, which are attached to the Amended Complaint. Plaintiff fails to allege facts of any agreement separate from the Notes and the purported extension of their maturity date. Finally, the language of the Notes reflect that they are, or at least purport to be, negotiable instruments within the meaning of Ohio law. Cf. Mohammad, 2012 WL 3132030, at *3-4 (<HOLDING>). Although a plaintiff is generally able to Options: A. holding that promissory estoppel is applicable only in the absence of an enforceable contract B. holding that the promissory note was a negotiable instrument as opposed to a contract for the purposes of determining the applicable statute of limitations C. holding that a promissory note is not enforceable against a party who signed the deed of trust but did not sign the promissory note inasmuch as promissory notes and deeds of trust are separate legal documents with unique purposes D. holding that when the basis of the earlier suit was that the plaintiff had had defaulted on a promissory note and the claim in the instant action is whether that promissory note was valid the transaction test is met E. holding that fraudulent collection on promissory note was reasonably related to breach of contract claim

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the promissory note was a negotiable instrument as opposed to a contract for the purposes of determining the applicable statute of limitations
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: specifically named two of its Texas employees and its accounting department, made factual statements about its provision of financial services that RSL contends were false and defamatory, and solicited participants in a class action lawsuit against the company. Wilkerson made his comments on websites that included a map and photograph of RSL’s Houston offices and that would be of particular interest to Texas residents investigating local firms that provide financial services, like RSL. Wilkerson complained of RSL’s acts undertaken in Texas, and— as the allegedly defamatory posts indicate — Wilkerson was aware that RSL is a resident of and has its principal place of business in Texas, where any harm was suffered. See BMC Software Belgium, N.V. v. Marchand, 83 S.W.3d 789, 795 (Tex.2002) (<HOLDING>). I would hold that Wilkerson’s “interaction” Options: A. holding that personal jurisdiction is proper if party has sufficient minimum contacts B. holding that foreseeability of causing injury in texas though not determinative is important consideration in establishing minimum contacts C. holding that sufficient minimum contacts exist when nonresident defendant purposefully directed action toward texas D. holding minimum contacts were necessary for personal jurisdiction over defendant E. holding that foreseeability of causing injury in forum state is not sufficient for specific personal jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that foreseeability of causing injury in texas though not determinative is important consideration in establishing minimum contacts
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: Butler v. Ross, 836 S.W.2d 833, 835-36 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, no writ) (five months); Allen v. Bentley Labs., Inc., 538 S.W.2d 857, 860 (Tex.Civ.App.—San Antonio 1976, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (six months)). Sharp contends, however, that she waited so long from the time of filing suit to procure citation and effect service on Kroger because the parties were working together to resolve the case. Sharp asserts that a reasonably prudent person would have continued working with Kroger “in an effort to save the cost of citation and service.” However, Sharp presented no evidence that the parties agreed to delay service during settlement negotiations. Unilaterally waiting to serve a defendant during settlement negotiations is not due diligence. Cf. Belleza-Gonzalez, 57 S.W.3d at 12 (<HOLDING>). We conclude that Sharp’s inaction for over Options: A. holding that an agreement to delay in effecting service must meet the requirements of texas rule of evidence 11 B. recognizing that a 11 evidence must be relevant to be admissible C. holding that where the entity was incorporated in texas and the shareholders reside in texas and the bankruptcy case is pending in texas texas law not arizona law should be applied D. recognizing the same rule in texas courts E. recognizing this texas rule

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an agreement to delay in effecting service must meet the requirements of texas rule of evidence 11
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Parties acknowledge and agree that irreparable injury to the other Parties would occur in the event any of the provisions of this Agreement were not performed in accordance with their specific terms or were otherwise breached and that such injury would not be adequately compensable by the remedies available at law (including the payment of money damages). It is accordingly agreed that Engine, on the one hand, and the Company, on the other hand (the “ Moving Party ”), will each be entitled to specific enforcement of, and injunctive relief to prevent any violation of, the terms hereof, and the other Parties will not take action, directly or indirectly, in opposition to the Moving Party seeking such relief on the grounds that any other remedy or relief is available at law or in equity. This Section 10 is not the exclusive remedy for any violation of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: at such time that blizzard elects to post a list of approved third-party user interfaces on its website , you agree that you will use only those third-party user interfaces approved by blizzard , and that you will use no other third-party user interfaces in connection with world of warcraft .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice, communication or payment required or permitted to be given or made hereunder shall be in writing and, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, shall be deemed given or made and effective (i) when delivered personally; or (ii) when delivered by telex or telecopy(if not a payment); or (iii) when received if sent by overnight express or mailed by certified, registered or regular mail, postage prepaid, addressed to parties at their address stated below, or to such other address as such party may designate by written notice in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 103-322, § 250002, 108 Stat. 2082, 2083 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2327(b)(3)). Contrary to Vicky’s assertion, the variation among these restitution statutes does not mean that Congress eliminated the proximate cause requirement for the specifically enumerated losses in subsections 2259(b)(3)(A) through (E). Rather, variances among these restitution statutes “demonstrate that Congress viewed particular offenses as causing foreseeable risks of certain losses [meriting enumeration] in the[se] [restitution] statutes.” Id. at 97 n. 13. The First Circuit concluded that, although Congress determined that restitution offenses foreseeably cause the losses in subsections (A) through (E), the defendant — to be liable — still must proximately cause the victim’s losses. See id. at 95-97, 99-100 (<HOLDING>). This court agrees. Congress determined that Options: A. holding that the proximate cause requirement was satisfied because the defendants actions resulted in identifiable losses as outlined in the expert reports and vickys victim impact statements footnote and citation omitted B. holding that the government may be an identifiable victim C. holding that the decedents estate had standing because the traditional requirement that the plaintiff show an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the conduct of the defendant is met by the allegation in the complaint that the defendants actions resulted in the diminishment of the assets of the estate D. holding that the victim impact and victim vulnerability aggravators were not overbroad and explaining that though the concepts of victim impact and victim vulnerability may well be relevant in every case evidence of victim vulnerability and victim impact in a particular case is inherently individualized E. holding that such reports fell within the core class of testimonial statements described in this courts leading confrontation clause decisions internal quotation marks and citation omitted

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the proximate cause requirement was satisfied because the defendants actions resulted in identifiable losses as outlined in the expert reports and vickys victim impact statements footnote and citation omitted