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: See Barnett, 415 F.3d at 692 (“Nothing is more common than an individual’s consenting to a search that would otherwise violate the Fourth Amendment, thinking that he will be better off than he would be by standing on his rights.”). Thus, we primarily focus on parolee cases. More direct to the issue we must decide, our review of those cases that enforce consent provisions of a parole agreement largely undervalue the rights of parolees, rendering them inapposite for a helpful and tight analysis under Iowa law. See Ochoa, 792 N.W.2d at 287-91. For example, many of these cases simply follow Samson. See, e.g., Wilson, 319 Ill.Dec. 353, 885 N.E.2d at 1042 (applying Samson to a parole agreement with different language than the language at issue in Samson ); Turner, 297 S.W.3d at 166 (<HOLDING>). Like Samson, Wilson is not a true consent Options: A. holding parole officer could extract consent from parolees sister prior to parolees release B. holding the specialneeds test remains the proper framework for analyzing the constitutionality of a dnaindexing statute when applied to probationers whose privacy interests are not as diminished as those of parolees C. holding that a parole condition which restricted a parolees access to the internet unless he had prior approval of his parole officer was reasonably related to reintegrating the parolee into his community and protecting the general public and did not violate parolees first amendment rights D. holding requirement that a prisoner agree to search condition of parole is reasonable in light of the parolees significantly diminished privacy interests E. holding warrantless search of common areas of parolees apartment which he shared with his mother was lawful even though parolees mother may not have consented to the search

assistant: The best answer is D. holding requirement that a prisoner agree to search condition of parole is reasonable in light of the parolees significantly diminished privacy interests
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 issuance of Shares will be subject to and conditioned upon compliance by the Company and you with all applicable state and federal laws and regulations and with all applicable requirements of any stock exchange or automated quotation system on which the Company’s Common Stock may be listed or quoted at the time of such issuance or transfer.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: §§ 15-25-31, -32 (omitting corroboration requirement); Del. Code Ann. tit. 11, § 3513 (requiring “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness” but not corroboration); Mont.Code Ann. § 46-16-220 (stating only that court must consider existence of corroboration as a factor in determining admissibility); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 51.385 (omitting corroboration requirement); Ohio Evid. R. 807 (requiring both unavailability and corroboration); Or.Rev.Stat. § 40.460(18a); 42 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 5985.1; Utah R.Crim. P. 15.5 (all omitting corroboration requirement). 7 . Haw. R. Evid. 804(b)(6) (requiring declar-ant be unavailable to testify); Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-460(dd) (requiring declarant be disqualified or unavailable to testify). 8 . See, e.g., Styron v. State, 34 So.3d 724, 731 (Ala.Crim.App.2009) (<HOLDING>); People v. Moreno, 160 P.3d 242, 246 Options: A. recognizing crawford partially abrogated alacode 152532 B. recognizing presumption C. recognizing rule D. recognizing change E. recognizing cause of action

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing crawford partially abrogated alacode 152532
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 Partner and the Partnership shall have all rights and remedies set forth in this Agreement and all rights and remedies which such Person has been granted at any time under any other agreement or contract and all of the rights which such Person has under any applicable law. Any Person having any rights under any provision of this Agreement or any other agreements contemplated hereby shall be entitled to seek enforcement of such rights specifically (without posting a bond or other security), to recover damages by reason of any breach of any provision of this Agreement and to exercise all other rights granted by applicable law.

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: Bohrer v. Hanes Corp., 715 F.2d 213, 217 (5th Cir.1983)). Thus, we review the jury verdict under the plain error standard, examining only whether the plaintiff has “presented any evidence in support of his claim.” Id. (emphasis added) (citations omitted). In an employment discrimination case, the plaintiff must show that he received disparate treatment because of his race, and that the proffered nondiscriminatory reason for his treatment was a pretext for racial discrimination. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 1824, 36 L.Ed.2d 668, 677 (1973). McKenzie has presented some, albeit minimal, evidence of treatment different from similarly situated nonmembers of his protected class. See Williams v. Trader Pub. Co., 218 F.3d 481, 484 (5th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). He has therefore met the plain error Options: A. holding that circumstantial evidence may be used to prove a wiretap claim including actual interception B. holding that the same types of evidence used to prove a title vii claim also may be used to prove a 1983 claim C. holding that fraud may be inferred from circumstantial evidence D. holding that such circumstantial evidence may be used to prove discrimination E. holding that circumstantial evidence maybe sufficient to prove venue

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that such circumstantial evidence may be used to prove discrimination
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Award of RSUs is documented by the records of the Committee or its delegate which shall be the final determinant of the number of Common Shares granted and the conditions of this Agreement. The Committee may amend or modify this Award in any manner to the extent that the Committee would have had the authority under the Plan initially to grant such Award, provided that no such amendment or modification shall materially diminish the Participant’s rights under this Agreement without his or her consent. Except as in accordance with the two immediately preceding sentences and Section 8.2, this Agreement may be amended, modified or supplemented only by an instrument in writing signed by both parties hereto.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In addition to the compensation provided here, the Company will reimburse you for reasonable business-related expenses incurred in good faith in the performance of your duties as Executive Chairman. Such payments shall be made by the Company in accordance with, and subject to, its normal policies for senior executives of the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Id. at 153, 121 S.Ct. 2079; see also United States v. Parker, No. WDQ-09-0360, 2011 WL 4682177, at *2 (D.Md. Oct. 3, 2011) (“Article IV(e)’s dismissal is strictly interpreted; there are no exceptions for de minimis, technical, or harmless errors.”); United States v. Gezelman, 522 F.Supp.2d 344, 347 (D.Mass.2007) (interpreting Bozeman as rejecting the view that a prisoner must be involved in rehabilitative programs for the IAD to apply and holding that the IAD must be strictly applied). Because the interpretation of the IAD is a question of federal law, we must follow the Supreme Court of the United States’ holding in Bozeman. See Cuyler, 449 U.S. at 438, 101 S.Ct. 703; In re All Assessments, 67 S.W.3d 805, 818-19 (Tenn.Ct.App.2001) (“[O]nly the decisions of the United Stat t.App.2000) (<HOLDING>); State v. Breen, 126 Idaho 305, 882 P.2d 472, Options: A. holding the iad inapplicable to a prisoner at a temporary holding facility and noting that while there may be an occasional case in which a prisoner awaiting transfer is involved in rehabilitative programs offered at the local facility such rehabilitation efforts themselves ultimately would be disrupted by that prisoners transfer to his permanent correctional residence B. holding that because the stated purpose of the iad is to prevent interference with a prisoners rehabilitative environment there is no reason for the iad to apply to a prisoner until he or she is assigned to the institution where the sentence will be served C. holding that an inmate had no liberty interest in avoiding transfer to a more restrictive facility D. holding the iad was not applicable to a prisoner who had been sentenced but was incarcerated in a local jail or holding facility while awaiting transfer to the assigned penal institution E. holding that court would not imply a bivens cause of action for a prisoner held in a private prison facility

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the iad inapplicable to a prisoner at a temporary holding facility and noting that while there may be an occasional case in which a prisoner awaiting transfer is involved in rehabilitative programs offered at the local facility such rehabilitation efforts themselves ultimately would be disrupted by that prisoners transfer to his permanent correctional residence
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 4.9 [Taxes] shall survive the resignation of the Administrative Agent or any assignment of rights by, or the replacement of, a Lender, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The agreements in this Section shall survive the resignation of the Administrative Agent, any L/C Issuer, the replacement of any Lender, the termination of the Commitments and the repayment, satisfaction or discharge of all the other Senior Credit 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Loan Parties and each other Subsidiary owns or has the right to use, under valid license agreements or otherwise, all patents, licenses, franchises, trademarks, trademark rights, service marks, service mark rights, trade names, trade name rights, trade secrets and copyrights (collectively, “ Intellectual Property ”) used in the conduct of its businesses, without known conflict with any patent, license, franchise, trademark, trademark right, service mark, service mark right, trade secret, trade name, copyright, or other proprietary right of any other Person, except where the failure to own or have the right to use such Intellectual Property, or such conflict with the proprietary right of any other Person, could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. All Intellectual Property is fully protected and/or duly and properly registered, filed or issued in the appropriate office and jurisdictions for such registrations, filing or issuances, except where the failure to do so could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. Except a claim that could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, no claim has been asserted by any Person with respect to the use of any such Intellectual Property by the Parent, the Borrower, any other Loan Party or any other Subsidiary, or challenging or questioning the validity or effectiveness of any such Intellectual Property. The use of such Intellectual Property by the Parent, the Borrower, the other Loan Parties and the other Subsidiaries does not infringe on the rights of any Person, subject to such claims and infringements as do not, in the aggregate, give rise to any liabilities on the part of the Parent, the Borrower, any other Loan Party or any other Subsidiary that could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: recover $116,075.65 from Merriam and $19,345.94 from Adams. II. Liability under CEPA 42. The CEPA, Conn. Gen.Stat. § 22a-16, provides in relevant part: [A]ny person, partnership, corporation, association, organization or other legal entity may maintain an action ... for declaratory and equitable relief against ... any person, partnership, corporation, association, organization or other legal entity, acting alone, or in combination with others, for the protection of the public trust in the air, water and other natural resources of the state from unreasonable pollution, impairment or destruction.... 43. Durham has standing to bring an action for declaratory relief under Conn. Gen.Stat. § 22a-16. See Bombero v. Planning & Zoning Comm’n of Trumbull, 40 Conn.App. 75, 88, 669 A.2d 598 (1996) (<HOLDING>). 44. The soil and ground water at, around, and Options: A. holding public interest does not favor granting an injunction where government action allegedly in violation of nepa might actually jeopardize natural resources B. holding that issues involving the local board of education were matters of public importance C. recognizing that public utilities affect the public interest in that they render essential public services to a large number of the general public D. holding that any member of the general public can initiate an action to raise issues involving the public trust in air water or other natural resources of the state E. holding that water conservation district elections and the public trust doctrine were two subjects improperly grouped under the general category of water

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that any member of the general public can initiate an action to raise issues involving the public trust in air water or other natural resources of the state
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 Seller Party nor any of their respective ERISA Affiliates sponsors, maintains, contributes to, or has within the immediately preceding five calendar years sponsored, maintained or contributed to, any Plans or Multiemployer Plans, the liability for which would reasonably be expected in the aggregate to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Moniz has been subjected to for his complaints about the corrupt and discriminatory towing policy carried out in Monroe County, Michigan.” R. 1 (Compl. at 6) (Page ID # 6). Section 1981 “prohibits intentional race discrimination in the making and enforcing of contracts involving both public and private actors.” Amini v. Oberlin Coll, 440 F.3d 350, 358 (6th Cir.2006); see 42 U.S.C. § 1981. To state a claim under § 1981, a plaintiff must plead, among other things, that “he belongs to an identifiable class of persons who are subject to discrimination based on their race” and that “the defendant intended to discriminate against him on the basis of race.” Amini, 440 F.3d at 358; see Gen. Bldg. Contractors Ass’n, Inc. v. Pennsylvania, 458 U.S. 375, 391, 102 S.Ct. 3141, 73 L.Ed.2d 835 (1982) (<HOLDING>). Racial discrimination includes discrimination Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs complaint failed to state a claim for purposeful and unlawful discrimination B. holding that a violation of 1981 requires purposeful race discrimination C. holding intentional or purposeful discrimination a necessary element of equal protection violation D. holding that 42 usc 1981 requires a showing of purposeful discrimination E. holding that the constitution prohibits a criminal defendant from engaging in purposeful discrimination on the ground of race in the exercise of peremptory challenges

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a violation of 1981 requires purposeful race discrimination
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: `` supplier '' means the provider of accommodation ( e.g. hotel , motel , apartment , bed & breakfast ) , ( theme ) parks , attractions , museums , sightseeing tours , cruises , rail and coach tours , transfers , tour operators , insurances , and any other travel or related product or service as from time to time available for reservation on the platform .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: excluded pretrial release on bail, time spent on bail pending appeal, and time spent on parole or probation, if revoked, from the definition of “custody”). This interpretation is augmented by the Ninth Circuit’s conclusion that a pretrial defendant who absconded from a halfway house to which he had been released on a personal recognizance bond could not be prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 751(a) for escape because he was not legally in custody. United States v. Baxley, 982 F.2d 1265, 1268-70 (9th Cir.1992). Dawson was confined to the premises of the halfway house at night only. During the day, he was to work at a job or to seek employment. Such liberty is markedly different from custodial incarceration in a penitentiary. See United States v. Parker, 902 F.2d 221, 222 (3d Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Thus, we have joined other circuits that have Options: A. recognizing that time spent in community confinement subject to bop custody entitles a prisoner to sentencing credit while community confinement on pretrial release does not because ujnlike defendants released on bail defendants who are detained or sentenced always remain subject to the control of the bureau B. holding confinement to home and work through electronic supervision does not equate to custody C. holding that state may not subject indigent defendants to period of imprisonment beyond statutory maximum D. holding that confinement in community treatment center after parole revocation was part of original term of imprisonment E. holding that confinement subject to a defendants being released to go to work cannot possibly be equated with an equivalent period of imprisonment

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that confinement subject to a defendants being released to go to work cannot possibly be equated with an equivalent period of imprisonment
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 owns or possesses or can obtain on commercially reasonable terms adequate rights or licenses to use, all trademarks, trade names, service marks, service mark registrations, service names, patents, patent rights, copyrights, inventions, licenses, approvals, governmental authorizations, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights necessary for the Company’s business as now conducted with respect to the 797 Assets, except for such failures to own or possess or obtain as would not be reasonably expected to have a Material Adverse Effect (the “ 797 Intellectual Property Rights ”). Except as disclosed in the SEC Reports, there is no claim, action or proceeding being made or brought, or to the knowledge of the Company, being threatened, against the Company regarding the 797 Intellectual Property Rights, except for such claim, action or proceedings as would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; and the Company is not aware of any facts or circumstances which might reasonably give rise to any of the foregoing infringements or claims, actions or proceedings, except for such facts and circumstances as would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: lied, he was allowed to undergo the procedure. Young was an adult and was told not to drive. The warning not to drive, especially where it is reinforced by having the patient sign a paper affirming he or she will not drive, is proportionate to the danger. After the procedure, it was learned that Young intended to drive. Nurse Diane Brown repeatedly asked Young not to drive. She made phone calls to try and get him a ride. When no one showed up to drive him, Brown offered to wait with Young at the Center until the medication wore off. Still, Young went on and drove his car to another medical appointment. Brown went well beyond what could be reasonably required. Short of tackling and forcibly restraining Young, which would not be legally permissible, there was nothing m S.W.3d 489 (2002) (<HOLDING>). A review of our case law reveals that in the Options: A. holding expert testimony is ordinarily required in legal malpractice cases to establish the standard of care B. holding that where a treating doctor is called to give an expert opinion on the standard of care that doctor is properly labeled an expert witness and must be disclosed to the other party along with other experts C. holding expert testimony not required to defeat summary judgment in medical malpractice suit because defendant doctors admissions were sufficient to establish the standard of care D. holding that where patients expert witness did not testify to what degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed by doctors in good standing in little rock or similar locales was patient failed to establish applicable standard of care thereby warranting directed verdict in favor of appellant doctor E. holding that evidence of prior similar acts was not proof of medical malpractice or whether the doctor lacked the proper degree of knowledge or skill

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that where patients expert witness did not testify to what degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed by doctors in good standing in little rock or similar locales was patient failed to establish applicable standard of care thereby warranting directed verdict in favor of appellant doctor
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower shall have delivered to Lender: (i) a certificate from the Secretary of State of Maryland that Borrower is in good standing and certificates from the Secretaries of State and of each other State in which the Borrower owns any property (Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin), has stationed any employees or agents, or otherwise conducts business, certifying the Borrower’s good standing as a corporation in each such State; (ii) a copy of the Resolutions passed by the Borrower’s Board of Directors authorizing the execution and delivery of the performance of Borrower’s obligations under the Loan Documents certified by the Secretary or Assistant Secretary to be true and correct; and (iii) a certificate or certificates, dated as of and delivered on the date of the execution of this Agreement and signed on behalf of the Borrower by the Secretary or Assistant Secretary, certifying the names of the officers authorized to execute and deliver the Loan Documents on behalf of the Borrower, together with the original, not photocopied, signatures of each officer. Borrower shall also deliver the same items specified in (i) above pertaining to the Bank from the appropriate regulatory agency.

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: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan, the Grant Notice and this Agreement constitute the entire agreement of the parties and supersede in their entirety all prior undertakings and agreements of the Company and its Affiliates and Participant with respect to the subject matter hereof.

assistant: Entire Agreements
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: 2.2 you can not accept these terms if : ( a ) you are not lawfully entitled to use the software , products and/or skype websites in the country in which you are located or reside or ( b ) if you are not of legal age to form a binding agreement with skype .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (3) breach of the contract by the defendant; and (4) damages sustained by the plaintiff as a result of the breach. Wright v. Christian & Smith, 950 S.W.2d 411, 412 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1997, no writ). To recover compensatory damages, the plaintiff must prove that he suffered some pecuniary loss as a result of the breach. Abraxas Petroleum Corp. v. Homburg, 20 S.W.3d 741, 758 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2000, no pet.); Multi-Moto Corp. v. ITT Comm. Fin. Corp., 806 S.W.2d 560, 569 (Tex.App.Dallas 1990, writ denied). Such losses must be the natural, probable, and foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s conduct. Mead v. Johnson Group, Inc., 615 S.W.2d 685, 687 (Tex.1981) (citing Hadley v. Baxendale, 9 Exch. 341, 354 (1854)); see, e.g., Stuart v. Bayless, 964 S.W.2d 920, 921 (Tex.1998) (<HOLDING>); Swanson v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., No. Options: A. holding that loss of contingency fees that lawyers might have earned from other clients was not foreseeable and directly traceable to clients failure to pay amounts due under contract B. holding that a lawyers willful absence from his clients trial is contemptuous C. holding that a law firm receiving funds for a client was not an initial transferee because the firms role with respect to the received money was to accept the funds in settlement of its clients case deposit the money in trust keep as fees only what the the clients agreed to and pay the rest to the bank on behalf of the clients in satisfaction of their loan D. holding that a law firm could intervene in a former clients action to protect its interest in its contingency fee E. holding that loss of substantial clients does not amount to an unconscionable injury

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that loss of contingency fees that lawyers might have earned from other clients was not foreseeable and directly traceable to clients failure to pay amounts due under contract
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: branding requirement. IV. CONCLUSION I would therefore affirm. 1 .See Op. at 139. 2 . See Op. at 144-145. 3 . See Kachemak Bay Watch, Inc. v. Noah, 935 P.2d 816, 825-26 (Alaska 1997). 4 . See id. at 821. 5 . See Board of Trade, Inc. v. State, Dep't of Labor, 968 P.2d 86, 89 (Alaska 1998). 6 . See Kodiak Seafood Processors Ass’n v. State, 900 P.2d 1191, 1197 (Alaska 1995) (citing Olson v. State, Dep't of Natural Resources, 799 P.2d 289, 292-93 (Alaska 1990)); see also Kachemak Bay Watch, 935 P.2d at 825. 7 . See AS 44.62.640(a)(3). 8 . 11 AAC 60.070 provides in full: All livestock permitted on a state grazing lease shall be properly identified and such identification registered in accordance with AS 03.40.010-03.40.270. In addition, the director may require that the livestock be 8-59 (<HOLDING>). 12 . See Usibelli Coal Mine, 921 P.2d at Options: A. holding that the challenge to a university regulation was moot because the regulation had been substantially amended B. holding that verbal requirement of need not contained in hunting regulation was addition of substance and thus regulation under apa C. holding that pma process is not specific regulation because the requirements are not contained in formal regulation D. holding that ojrdinarily when a regulation is not promulgated in compliance with the apa the regulation is invalid however when equity demands the regulation can be left in place while the agency follows the necessary procedures citation omitted E. holding that agency decision calculating royalties was not regulation because it did not involve making of policy decisions and did riot make addition of substance

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that verbal requirement of need not contained in hunting regulation was addition of substance and thus regulation under apa
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 Member understands and acknowledges that ARMEAU may refuse to transfer the ARMEAU Shares, unless the Member complies with Section 3.7 and any other restrictions on transferability set forth herein. The Member consents to ARMEAU making a notation on its records or giving instructions to any transfer agent of ARMEAU Shares in order to implement the restrictions on transfer of the ARMEAU Shares.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Parties agree that irreparable damage would occur, and that the Parties would not have any adequate remedy at Law, in the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement were not performed in accordance with their specific terms or were otherwise breached. It is accordingly agreed that the Parties shall be entitled to an injunction or injunctions to prevent breaches of this Agreement and to specifically enforce the terms and provisions of this Agreement, without proof of actual damages or otherwise, in addition to any other remedy to which any party hereto is entitled at Law or in equity. Each party hereto agrees to waive any requirement for the securing or posting of any bond in connection with such remedy. The Parties further agree not to assert that a remedy of specific enforcement is unenforceable, invalid, contrary to Law or inequitable for any reason, nor to assert that a remedy of monetary damages would provide an adequate remedy. In furtherance of the foregoing, the Parties hereby further acknowledge and agree that prior to the Closing, Starwood and Vistana shall be entitled to specific performance to enforce specifically the terms and provisions of and to prevent or cure breaches of this Agreement by ILG.

assistant: Enforcements
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 in writing and court "shall answer any such communication in writing”); Walker v. State, 440 S.W.2d 653, 659 (Tex.Crim.App.1969) ("If the jury after retirement request additional instructions upon a question of law and the subject matter of the request is proper there can be no question but [tjhat the Court should give such instructions in writing.”); Gamblin v. State, 476 S.W.2d 18, 20 (Tex.Crim.App.1972) (Article 36.27 "requires the court to answer communications of the jury and give additional instructions upon questions of law when the request is proper. If not, the court should inform the jury that their request is not proper by referring to the court’s charge.”). 3 . Appellant also cites to other cases, including Matamoros v. State, 901 S.W.2d 470, 477 (Tex.Crim.App.1995) (<HOLDING>), and Brown v. State, 122 S.W.3d 794, 802 Options: A. holding that the erroneous admission of dna evidence is never harmless B. holding that a challenged jury instruction did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof when the trial court elsewhere instructed the jury that the state must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt C. recognizing that in prior decisions the court had used the term inconclusive to mean that dna evidence did not exclude an individual but clarifying that in the future the term inconclusive would be used only when a dna sample does not contain enough dna to draw a conclusion dna is degraded or for other reasons a dna test yields no results or the examiner draws no conclusion D. holding that admission of evidence is harmless if it is cumulative to other legitimately admitted evidence that establishes a defendants guilt beyond a reasonable doubt E. holding trial court properly denied jury instruction that mere admission of dna evidence does not mean that court vouches for its reliability or that results should be accepted as proof beyond reasonable doubt because that is comment on weight of evidence by singling out particular evidence for special attention

assistant: The best answer is E. holding trial court properly denied jury instruction that mere admission of dna evidence does not mean that court vouches for its reliability or that results should be accepted as proof beyond reasonable doubt because that is comment on weight of evidence by singling out particular evidence for special attention
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: residence used for drug distribution), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 993, 110 S.Ct. 543, 107 L.Ed.2d 540 (1989); Dunn, supra, 846 F.2d at 762-63 (sustaining trial court’s admission of expert testimony explaining that vials, wax-paper bags, I-beam scales, measuring spoons, and m L.Ed.2d 614 (1982); United States v. Maher, 645 F.2d 780, 783-84 (9th Cir.1981) (upholding admission of expert testimony comparing defendant’s activities to those of persons conducting counter-surveillance while transporting drugs). A number of state courts have applied similar reasoning in concluding that expert testimony concerning the modus operandi of drug dealers would be likely to enhance the jury’s ability to understand the evidence adduced. See, e.g., State v. Salazar, 27 Ariz.App. 620, 557 P.2d 552, 557 (1976) (<HOLDING>); State v. Vilalastra, 207 Conn. 35, 540 A.2d Options: A. holding admissible expert testimony concerning countersurveillance techniques commonly used by narcotics dealers specifically including practice of using vehicle to observe in advance area where distribution was intended to occur B. holding admissible police officers testimony that firearms are commonly used in drug trafficking C. holding that using the opinions of an expert that were not testified to during trial which were irrelevant and solely used to destroy the credibility of the expert was not admissible D. holding admissible expertwitness testimony that drug dealers commonly register cars and apartments in names of female friends to conceal narcotics activities E. holding admissible police officers expert testimony that narcotics dealers often use intermediary in making delivery to buyer under mistaken assumption that intermediary would insulate dealers from criminal liability

assistant: The best answer is A. holding admissible expert testimony concerning countersurveillance techniques commonly used by narcotics dealers specifically including practice of using vehicle to observe in advance area where distribution was intended to occur
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their permitted successors and assigns. No party to this Guarantee may assign or delegate, by operation of Law or otherwise, all or any portion of its rights or liabilities under this Guarantee without the prior written consent of the other party to this Guarantee, which any such party may withhold in its absolute discretion. No assignment by any party shall relieve such party of any of its obligations hereunder. Any purported assignment not permitted hereby shall be null and void.

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: deed is ambiguous as to what the parties intended, so we look to extrinsic evidence of the parties’ intentions and the circumstances surrounding the conveyance. See Ettinger, 166 N.H. at 450. Such evidence shows that the parties agreed to an easement, and that it was not unilaterally created. As the trial court noted, the Horgans and Caligaris were consistent in their testimony that the Horgans knew of the easement before they purchased Lot 17. Because Lot 17 was the first property sold in the development, the circumstances were such that not all details about the property or the community had been finalized. Caligaris stated that the deed’s language acted as a “catch-all” that allowed them to precisely define the easement later. Cf. Duxbary-Fox v. Shakhnovich, 159 N.H. 275, 282 (2009) (<HOLDING>). The conduct of the parties also points to an Options: A. recognizing that where the location of a deeded right of way is uncertain it may be clarified by the agreement of subsequent owners B. holding that subsequent property owners were bound by prior owners agreement to restrict building density and preserve certain portions of land as a condition of the original zoning approval C. recognizing that the right of redemption is one of the most important rights provided by the states to owners of real property D. holding that a settlement payment made when the law was uncertain cannot be successfully attacked on the basis of any subsequent resolution of the uncertainty E. holding that the district court had personal jurisdiction over the defendant when the site of a copyright owners alleged injury is the location of the copyright owner

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that where the location of a deeded right of way is uncertain it may be clarified by the agreement of subsequent owners
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 notices and other communications required hereunder shall be in writing and shall be delivered personally or mailed by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight express courier service. In the case of the Participant, mailed notices shall be addressed to him or her at the home address which he or she most recently communicated to the Company in writing. In the case of the Company, mailed notices shall be addressed to the Plan Administrator, as follows: Chief Human Resources Officer, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, 675 McDonnell Boulevard, Hazelwood, MO 63042, with a copy to the Company’s general counsel, as follows: General Counsel, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, 675 McDonnell Boulevard, Hazelwood, MO 63042.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall use the net proceeds from the sale of the Securities hereunder for working capital purposes and shall not use such proceeds: (a) [reserved], (b) [reserved], (c) for the settlement of any outstanding litigation or (d) in violation of FCPA or OFAC regulations.

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: instructed the jury in a way that was unconstitutionally vague itself. Although the instruction given in Pur-sell’s case differs slightly from the one given in Maynard, these differences do not cure the vagueness problem at issue. First, the trial court added the phrase “manifesting exceptional depravity” to the clearly unconstitutional phrase “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel.” While this addition was meant to limit the “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel” phrase, it actually exacerbated the constitutional problem. For one, the United States Supreme Court has held that the use of the word “depravity,” even when accompanied by the words “especially heinous [or] cruel,” is unconstitutionally vague. Walton v. Arizona, 497 U.S. 639, 654, 110 S.Ct. 3047, 111 L.Ed.2d 511 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Richmond v. Lewis, 506 U.S. 40, 47, 113 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that heinous atrocious or cruel is unconstitutionally vague language B. holding unconstitutionally vague under the reasoning of godfrey an aggravatingcircumstances instruction directing jurors to determine whether the murder was especially heinous atrocious and cruel C. holding factor b is not unconstitutionally vague D. holding that oklahomas especially heinous atrocious or cruel aggravating circumstance was unconstitutionally vague E. holding that there is no serious argument that the especially heinous cruel or depraved aggravating factor is not facially vague

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that there is no serious argument that the especially heinous cruel or depraved aggravating factor is not facially vague
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if the tripadvisor media group companies are found liable for any loss or damage that arises out of or is in any way connected with your use of our sites or services , then the tripadvisor media group companies ' liabilities will in no event exceed , in the aggregate , the greater of ( a ) the transaction fees paid to tripadvisor for the transaction ( s ) on this website giving rise to the claim , or ( b ) one-hundred dollars ( us $ 100.00 ) .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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: On the Effective Date, the Creditor on behalf of himself/herself/itself and each of his/her/its heirs, successors, subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, attorneys and personal representatives (a “ Creditor Party ”), hereby fully and completely releases and forever discharges the Company and its subsidiaries, and each of the respective current, future and former officers, employees, directors, managers, members, stockholders, agents, attorneys, affiliates, predecessors, successors and assigns and representatives of the foregoing and their respective heirs and agents (collectively, the “ Company Released Parties ”) from any and all claims, demands, proceedings, causes of action, orders, obligations, contracts, agreements, liens, encumbrances, security interest (whether statutory or contractual), attachments, debts and liabilities whatsoever, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, foreseen or unforeseen, liquidated or unliquidated, both at law and in equity related directly or indirectly to the relationship between the Creditor and the Company (a “ Claim ”), that the Creditor Party now has, has ever had or may hereafter have against the respective Company Released Parties, arising contemporaneously with, or prior to the date hereof (the “ Release Date ”).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: In our view, the recurring reference to wells and drilling combined with the rather general language relied upon by MRO makes the statute ambiguous. (519 So.2d at 1195). The court then cited this court’s opinion in Clarkco Contractors v. Texas Eastern Gas Pipeline, 615 F.Supp. 775 (M.D.La. 1985) and further noted: ... The Legislature was obviously concerned about wells and drilling, not about pipeline transportation or refining of oil, and this concern is reflected in this statute. We will not extend the scope of the statute beyond the legislative intent by broadly inte La.App. 4th Cir.1989), writ denied 547 So.2d 1317 (La.1989) (applying the Act to a contract for welding services on an offshore gas line platform) and Ferguson v. Stringray Pipeline Co., 672 F.Supp. 944 (W.D.La.1987) (<HOLDING>). While Murray and Ferguson distinguished Options: A. holding that an agencys policy shift reallocating the burden of proof from natural gas importers to parties opposing importation was based on a reasonable interpretation of the natural gas act B. holding that gas line is not improvement C. holding act applicable to contract for replacement of recuperators on a compression station on a natural gas line platform located offshore D. recognizing the need for natural gas supply as a substantial public interest E. holding that injury caused by criminal fleeing after stealing gas from gas station was not foreseeable result of stations policy of not requiring customers to prepay for gas

assistant: The best answer is C. holding act applicable to contract for replacement of recuperators on a compression station on a natural gas line platform located offshore