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: or management of the partnerships. According to Nichols, his involvement was limited to signing documents. Despite Nichols’ efforts to distance himself from his partnerships’ activities within the state of Florida, it was proper for the trial court to consider these activities in determining that Nichols had continuous and systematic general business contacts in Florida. Florida courts have recognized that, because a limited partnership gains its identity from its general partners, the limited partnership’s contacts with a particular forum may be attributed to the general partners. Kelly v. Department of Insurance, 597 So.2d 900 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Levinson v. Brosche, 578 So.2d 477 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). See also Vespe Contracting Co. v. Anvan Corp., 433 F.Supp. 1226 (E.D.Pa.1977) (<HOLDING>). In addition to these partnership activities, Options: A. holding that limited partner does not have standing to sue for injuries to partnership that merely diminish value of that partners interest B. recognizing same principle C. recognizing that same principle applies where defendant is general partner of limited partnership which in turn is general partner of limited partnership with contacts with state D. holding that the information contained in the certificate of limited partnership binds the partnership and the partners with respect to third parties E. recognizing partnership by estoppel only with respect to claims by persons who have reasonably relied upon outward representations of partnership

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that same principle applies where defendant is general partner of limited partnership which in turn is general partner of limited partnership with contacts with 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: Any and all notices or other communications or deliveries to be provided by the Holders hereunder including, without limitation, any Notice of Conversion, shall be in writing and delivered personally, by facsimile, or sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier service, addressed to the Company, at the address set forth above Attention: Arend Verweij via email: averweij@insightinnovators.com or such other email or address as the Company may specify for such purposes by notice to the Holders delivered in accordance with this Section 9. Any and all notices or other communications or deliveries to be provided by the Company hereunder shall be in writing and delivered personally, by facsimile, or sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier service addressed to each Holder at the facsimile number or address of such Holder appearing on the books of the Company, or if no such facsimile number or address appears on the books of the Company, at the principal place of business of such Holder, as set forth in the Purchase Agreement. Any notice or other communication or deliveries hereunder shall be deemed given and effective on the earliest of (i) the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile at the facsimile number set forth in this Section prior to 5:30 p.m. (New York City time) on any date, (ii) the next Trading Day after the date of transmission, if such notice or communication is delivered via facsimile at the facsimile number set forth in this Section on a day that is not a Trading Day or later than 5:30 p.m. (New York City time) on any Trading Day, (iii) the second Trading Day following the date of mailing, if sent by U.S. nationally recognized overnight courier service, or (iv) upon actual receipt by the party to whom such notice is required to be given.

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: (a) All written information furnished to either Agent or any Lender and all other information presented to either Agent or any Lender in due diligence sessions, in each case, by the Borrower or any of its representatives (other than projections (if any)) is, when taken as a whole, complete and correct in all material respects and does not, when taken as a whole, contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements contained herein or therein not misleading in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made and (b) any projections made available to either Agent or any Lender by the Borrower or any of its representatives have been prepared in good faith based upon assumptions believed by the Borrower to be reasonable at the time furnished (it being understood that such projections are not to be viewed as facts and are subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies, any of which are beyond the Borrower’s control, and that no assurance can be given that any particular projection will be realized, that actual results may differ from projected results and that such differences may be material). The Borrower has disclosed to the Agents and the Lenders all agreements, instruments and corporate or other restrictions to which it or any of its Subsidiaries is subject, and all other matters known to it, that, individually or in the aggregate, could be reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Disclosures
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: analysis and did not provide any guidance as to its future implications.... ”); Schafer, 598 N.E.2d at 553 (“Sturrup is out of the mainstream of caselaw on equal protection analysis_(citation omitted));. Robbins, 941 F.Supp. at 793 (“Federal equal protection ‘rational basis’ analysis does not contain an ‘overbroad’ component. Rather, high school transfer rules, like the rule in question, are valid and enforceable.” (citations omitted)); Jordan, 813 F.Supp. at 1381 (refusing to apply Sturrup overbreadth scrutiny and writing “Indiana’s practice of subjecting equal protection and procedural due process claims to ‘over 75 (N.D.Ill.1978) (finding Illinois version of Transfer Rule did not violate equal protection); Simkins v. S.D. High Sch. Activities Ass’n, 434 N.W.2d 367 (S.D.1989) (<HOLDING>); Chabert v. La. High Sch. Athletic Ass’n, 323 Options: A. holding illinois high school associations version of the transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection B. holding transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection C. holding that the cap does not violate equal protection D. holding that doctrine does not violate equal protection E. holding transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection as rule was uniformly applied not arbitrary and rationally related to legitimate government interest

assistant: The best answer is B. holding transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection
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: S.Ct. 141, 116 L.Ed.2d 108 (1991). 3 . The facts alleged in Ms. Goren's complaint are different from those we evaluated in MCM Partners, Inc. v. Andrews-Bartlett & Assocs., Inc., 62 F.3d 967, 977-79 (7th Cir.1995). In that case, the plaintiff alleged an "association-in-fact" enterprise consisting of several defendants and pursued RICO claims against "lower rung" members of the enterprise despite the fact that they had merely implemented the decisions of other members of the enterprise. The district court dismissed the claims against those defendants because, in its view, they did not play any role in the direction of the enterprise. We reversed and held that the defendants could be held liable because they had knowingly implemented the decisions of upper management and thereby part (<HOLDING>); University of Md. at Baltimore v. Peat, Options: A. holding that plaintiffs allegation that defendant engaged in multiple instances of mail and wire fraud did not allege pattern of racketeering activity with sufficient particularity B. holding that defendant who was associated with the enterprise and engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity when he repeatedly violated the antifraud provisions of the securities laws was not liable under 1962c because he had no part in directing the enterprises affairs C. holding that to constitute an enterprise under rico the enterprises structure must provide some mechanism for controlling and directing the affairs of the group on an ongoing rather than an ad hoc basis D. holding that to prevail under civil rico plaintiff must prove that defendants participated in the conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity E. holding that in order to plead adequate rico complaint plaintiff must allege that defendant had some part in the direction of the alleged enterprises affairs

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendant who was associated with the enterprise and engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity when he repeatedly violated the antifraud provisions of the securities laws was not liable under 1962c because he had no part in directing the enterprises affairs
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: A buyer-side representation and warranty insurance policy underwritten by Concord Specialty Risk is being conditionally bound as of the date hereof (the “R&W Insurance Policy”). Sellers shall bear fifty percent (50%) of the cost of the R&W Insurance Policy (including underwriting fee, premium, premium taxes, and any broker expenses), by including such amount as a Seller Expense, provided, however, that in no event shall R&W Insurance Policy costs greater than $460,000 be included in Seller Expenses or otherwise be payable by the Sellers in respect of the R&W Insurance Policy. Any other fees, costs or deductibles associated therewith shall be borne solely by Buyer. Buyer agrees to not seek to make, enter into or consent to, any amendment to the R&W Insurance Policy following the Closing that would materially and adversely affect the rights of the Sellers hereunder without the prior written consent of the Sellers’ Representative.

assistant: Representations
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: You are eligible to participate in the benefits provided by the Company to its employees. Where any particular benefit is governed by a formal plan document, your eligibility and coverage will be determined by such document, and the Company may change its benefit offerings from time to time in its discretion to meet its business needs. The Company retains the right to change, add or cease any particular benefit.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any provision of this Agreement that may be determined by competent authority to be prohibited or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such prohibition or unenforceability without invalidating the remaining provisions hereof, and any such prohibition or unenforceability in any jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: accurately depict the crime scene and the victim, and are therefore not rendered inadmissible simply because they may be gruesome or shocking. Walker, 258 Va. at 69, 515 S.E.2d at 574 (citing Walton v. Commonwealth, 256 Va. 85, 92, 501 S.E.2d 134, 138, cert, denied, 525 U.S. 1046 (1998)). The photographs are relevant to show “motive, intent, method, malice, premeditation and the atrociousness of [the defendant’s] crimes.” Chichester v. Commonwealth, 248 Va. 311, 326, 448 S.E.2d 638, 648 (1994), cert, denied, 513 U.S. 1166 (1995) (quoting Spencer, 238 Va. at 312, 384 S.E.2d at 796). Any prejudice to the defendant resulting from the admission of the photographs is outweighed by the photographs’ probative value. See Coe v. Commonwealth, 231 Va. 83, 87, 340 S.E.2d 820, 823 (1986) (<HOLDING>). On appeal, we will not disturb a trial Options: A. recognizing the probative value of objective and reliable hearsay evidence B. holding that the probative value of evidence that defendant had recently been released from prison offered to show identity opportunity and motive outweighed its prejudicial effect in bank robbery prosecution C. holding that explicit finding that probative value of similar transactions outweighed their prejudicial impact is not required D. holding probative value of evidence must be balanced against any prejudicial effect E. holding that trial court has discretion to determine whether probative value of photo outweighs prejudicial effect

assistant: The best answer is D. holding probative value of evidence must be balanced against any prejudicial effect
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: Employee will make and maintain, and not destroy, notes and other records related to the conception, creation, discovery, and other development of Company Intellectual Property. These records shall be considered the exclusive property of the Employer and are covered by Paragraphs 1 and 3 above. During employment and for a period of one (1) year thereafter, Employee will promptly disclose to the Employer (without revealing the trade secrets of any third party) any Intellectual Property that Employee creates, conceives, or contributes to, alone or with others, that involve, result from, relate to, or may reasonably be anticipated to have some relationship to the line of business the Employer is engaged in or its actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development activity.

assistant: Records
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: because the “p ary Educ. Expense Bd., 131 F.3d 353, 361, 45 USPQ2d 1001, 1007 (3d Cir.1997) (stating that the right to be free of unfair competition under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (1994), does not implicate a property right under the Fourteenth Amendment and noting: “If a state’s conduct impacting on a business always implicated the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress would have almost unrestricted power to subject states to suit through the exercise of its abrogation power. Congress could pass any law that tangentially affected the ability of businesses to operate and then create causes of action against the states in federal court if they infringed on those federally created rights.”); cf. In re Creative Goldsmiths, Inc., 119 F.3d 1140, 1146-47 (4th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1517, 140 Options: A. holding the fourteenth amendment does not apply to the actions of the federal government B. holding that congress exceeded its authority under 5 of the fourteenth amendment in attempting to abrogate the states eleventh amendment immunity in adea suits C. holding that congress may abrogate a states immunity pursuant to its enforcement power under 5 of the fourteenth amendment D. holding that congress could not validly abrogate state sovereign immunity under the bankruptcy code because if the fourteenth amendment is held to apply so broadly as to justify congress enactment of the bankruptcy code as a requirement of due process then the same argument would justify every federal enforcement scheme as a requirement of due process under the fourteenth amendment E. holding that bankruptcy jurisdiction is not within section 5 of the fourteenth amendment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that congress could not validly abrogate state sovereign immunity under the bankruptcy code because if the fourteenth amendment is held to apply so broadly as to justify congress enactment of the bankruptcy code as a requirement of due process then the same argument would justify every federal enforcement scheme as a requirement of due process under the fourteenth 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: conduct violations in August 2015. (ECF No. 26-1, at 3). Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed the complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on July 28, 2015. (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff seeks money damages and injunctive relief. Several weeks later, the action was transferred to this court. (ECF Nos. 16; 17). Plaintiff moved for emergency injunctive relief on September 2 (ECF No. 24), which the court denied (ECF No. 25). Shortly thereafter, Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. (ECF Nos. 26; 27), Plaintiff was provided with a Roseboro notice, which advised him of the pendency of the motion to dismiss and his entitlement to respond within 17 days. (ECF Nos. 28; 29); see Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309, 310 (4th Cir.1975) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff responded in opposition, and Options: A. holding that pro se plaintiffs should be advised of their right to file responsive material to a motion for summary judgment B. recognizing responsive pleadings may be necessary for a pro se plaintiff to clarify his legal theories C. holding that a defendant has a right to proceed pro se at trial D. holding that pro se litigants should be given reasonable opportunity to remedy the defects in their pleadings E. holding that a pro se party must be advised of consequences of failing to respond to a dispositive motion including an explanation that the failure to respond may result in the district court granting the motion and dismissing the case

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that pro se plaintiffs should be advised of their right to file responsive material to a motion for summary judgment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: we reserve the right , at our sole discretion and where technically feasible , to disable your access to or ability to use services that we believe present a health and safety risk or violate our community standards , agreements , laws , regulations or policies .

assistant: Unilateral termination
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 acknowledges that money damages would be both incalculable and an insufficient remedy for any breach of this License by such Party and that any such breach would cause the other Party irreparable harm. Accordingly, subject to the next sentence, each Party also agrees that, in the event of any breach or threatened breach of the provisions of this License by such Party, the other Party shall be entitled to equitable relief without the requirement of posting a bond or other security, including in the form of injunctions and orders for specific performance, in addition to all other remedies available to such other Party at law or in equity.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event it is necessary for either party to retain the services of a lawyer to enforce the provisions of this GDPA or to file or defend any action arising out of this GDPA, then the prevailing party in any such action shall be entitled, in addition to any other rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity, to recover from the other party its reasonable fees for lawyers and expert witnesses, plus such court costs and expenses as may be fixed by any court of competent jurisdiction. The term “prevailing party” for the purposes of this section shall include a defendant who has by motion, judgment, verdict or dismissal by the court, successfully defended against any claim that has been asserted against it.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: ( c ) nothing in this sections 13.3 or otherwise in these terms shall exclude or in any way limit headspace 's liability for : fraud ; death or personal injury caused by negligence ; or liability to the extent the same may not be excluded or limited as a matter of law .

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: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Mortgagor hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives and releases (a) all benefit that might accrue to Mortgagor by virtue of any present or future statute of limitations or law or judicial decision exempting the Mortgaged Property from attachment, levy or sale on execution or providing for any stay of execution, exemption from civil process, redemption or extension of time for payment, (b) all notices of any Event of Default or of Mortgagee’s election to exercise or the actual exercise of any right, remedy or recourse provided for under the Priority Lien Documents, and (c) any right to a marshalling of assets or a sale in inverse order of alienation.

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: Except as routinely encountered in claims activity, there are no actions, suits, proceedings or investigations pending or, to the Knowledge of the Borrower, threatened against the Borrower or any of its Subsidiaries at law or in equity before any Official Body as to which there is a reasonable possibility of an adverse determination and that, if adversely determined, could reasonably be expected, individually or in the aggregate, to result in a Material Adverse Change. Neither the Borrower nor any of its Subsidiaries is in violation of any order, writ, injunction or any decree of any Official Body which could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Change.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: A Participant will be deemed to have incurred a Disability where the Participant (a) is unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment that can be expected to result in death or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months, (b) is, by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months, receiving income replacement benefits for a period of not less than 3 months under an accident and health plan maintained by the Company, or (c) has been determined to be totally disabled by the Social Security Administration.

assistant: Disability
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: evidence of identity as long as they have been used. The fact of the individuality of the corrugations of the skin on the fingers of the human hand is now so generally recognized that a fingerprint is in reality an unforgeable signature.” Avent v. Commonwealth, 209 Va. 474, 478, 164 S.E.2d 655, 658 (1968) (alterations and internal citation marks omitted). It is true, as Winslow contends, that a mere fingerprint viewed in isolation, wholly independently of any contextual circumstances, often falls far short of proving guilt. But it is equally true that the circumstances tending to reasonably exclude the hypothesis that the print was impressed at a time other than that of the crime need not be circumstances completely independent of the fingerprint, and may properl .E.2d 357, 361 (1977) (<HOLDING>). It necessarily follows that the prosecution Options: A. holding record references in statement of facts of appellate brief were sufficient to raise no evidence point when coupled with argument B. holding that a reasonable inference need not be the sole possible inference C. holding that coupled with the evidence of defendants fingerprint those other circumstances discussed in avent were sufficient to create a rational inference that the defendant was the criminal agent D. holding that allegations of motive and opportunity were not enough to create a strong inference of scienter E. holding that evidence of intoxication together with the circumstances of the accident were sufficient to demonstrate recklessness

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that coupled with the evidence of defendants fingerprint those other circumstances discussed in avent were sufficient to create a rational inference that the defendant was the criminal agent
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 Loan Party agrees to, to the extent required by the Loan Documents, make, execute and deliver all such additional and further acts, things, deeds, instruments and documents as the Administrative Agent may reasonably require for the purposes of implementing or effectuating the provisions of this Third Amendment and the other Loan Documents.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and battery occurs “when a person is placed in imminent apprehension of harmful or offensive bodily contact and there is an actual use of force.” Cohen v. Davis, 926 F.Supp. 399, 402 (S.D.N.Y.1996) (citing 6 N.Y. Jur.2d § 1). Plaintiff has established that he was in “imminent apprehension” that the officers would eng entional. However, where there has been a lawful arrest, intentional contact with the arrested person does not constitute assault and battery, provided such force is reasonable. See, e.g., Lorensen v. State, 249 A.D.2d 762, 671 N.Y.S.2d 790 (3d Dep’t 1998) (upholding a finding that force used during a lawful arrest was “no more than necessary” in light of the circumstances); Wyllie v. District Atty., of County of Kings, 2 A.D.3d 714, 770 N.Y.S.2d 110 (2d Dep’t 1996) (<HOLDING>). Conversely, when “an arrest is determined to Options: A. holding alvarez and garza were not entitled to judgment as a matter of law on their affirmative defense of limitations when they did not negate the discovery rule in their summary judgment motions B. recognizing the cause of action C. holding that whether pleadings fail to state a cause of action may not be resolved by summary judgment D. holding that state defendants demonstrated their entitlement to summary judgment on the second assault and battery cause of action by demonstrating the reasonableness of their conduct in arresting and transporting the plaintiff E. recognizing that when a cause of action is reduced to a judgment the cause of action is merged into the judgment and thereafter only an action on the judgment exists

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that state defendants demonstrated their entitlement to summary judgment on the second assault and battery cause of action by demonstrating the reasonableness of their conduct in arresting and transporting the plaintiff
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 agrees to do such further acts and things, and to execute and deliver such additional conveyances, assignments, agreements and instruments, as the Lender may at any time reasonably request in connection with the administration or enforcement of this Agreement or the Related Documents or in order better to assure and confirm unto the Lender its rights, powers and remedies hereunder.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: at 173-74 (explaining the District Court retains subject matter jurisdiction to rule on such motions because they are a continuation of the criminal case); see also id. at 173 n. 11 (emphasizing that appeals of § 2255 dispositions are governed by the civil rules). However, we did not need to decide which part of Fed. R. A pp. P. 4 applied because the Thomas notice of appeal, which was filed ten days after the relevant order was entered, was timely either way. Other cases discussing miscellaneous criminal post-judgment motions like the one here yield no clear direction. Compare United States v. Davis, 532 F.2d 752, 752 (4th Cir.1976) (per curiam) (suggesting that a post-judgment transcript request was a criminal matter), with United States v. Miramontez, 995 F.2d 56, 58 (5th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). In any event, we will consider the merits of Options: A. holding that motions under rule 60b1 may not be used to evade the time limits of rule 4a in a case with a procedural posture similar to washingtons B. recognizing that as of july 11 1994 contempt proceedings arising from civil actions are no longer governed by rule 333 ala rcrim p and instead are governed by rule 70a C. holding that postjudgment postcollateralrelief request for grandjury transcripts was civil in nature and governed by rule 4a D. holding that the filed rate doctrine barred request for damages but did not preclude request for injunction and civil penalties E. holding that constructively fraudulent transfers are governed by rule 8

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that postjudgment postcollateralrelief request for grandjury transcripts was civil in nature and governed by rule 4a
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: contention that he did not recognize the cause of his psychological harm would require the court to conclude that Martin also did not realize the reason for his interview and the rationale behind his plea for leniency at his sentencing hearing. In addition, the evaluation report detailed the causal link between the psychological harm and the sexual abuse, and Martin read at least a portion of the report. Based on the purpose of the evaluation report, its substance, and Martin’s review of it, Martin possessed at least a modicum of knowledge of the causal link between the abuse and the psychological injury. Moreover, the nature of the abuse and the injuries inflicted did not inhibit Martin from recognizing the cause of the psychological harm. See Doe v. Creighton, 439 Mass. at 284 (<HOLDING>). As discussed above, this is not a case Options: A. holding that when training takes place in an educational setting the analysis should focus on which party receives the primary benefit of the work performed by the students B. holding that in determining whether a crime is a continuing offense the court must focus on the nature of the substantive offense and not on the specific characteristics of the conduct in the case at issue C. holding that the courts analysis should focus on the nature of the abuse injuries inflicted and the effect of both D. recognizing the more narrow focus of a good faith analysis E. holding hospital employees testimony regarding victims previous injuries was inadmissible under the common scheme or plan exception because there was no clear and convincing evidence defendant inflicted the injuries

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the courts analysis should focus on the nature of the abuse injuries inflicted and the effect of both
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: any material you upload to our service or data that we collect as set out above ( section 11 ) will be considered non-confidential and non-proprietary , and you acknowledge and agree that we have the right to use , copy , distribute , sell and disclose to third parties any such material or data for any purpose related to our business .

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: that the plaintiff was a responsible person because he: owned 100 percent of the corporation’s voting stock; acted as chairman of the board of directors; had authority to sign corporate checks and to borrow money for the corporation; and played a large role in obtaining financing for the corporation. Id. at 966-67. Significantly, the Tsoup-rake court added: Although [another corporate director] ran the day to day operations of the corporation and agreed to the assessment against him, the Plaintiff was not relieved of responsibility. More than one person may be a “responsible person” of a corporation.... the Plaintiff had the power to control the financial affairs of the corporation through his exclusive ability to finance its operations. Id. at 967. See also Thosteson, 331 F.3d 1294 (<HOLDING>); George v. United States, 819 F.2d 1008, 1011 Options: A. holding owner of company qualified as an employer due to inter alia his authority to hire and fire employees and overall financial control of company B. holding that plaintiffs failure to mention vice president of thirdparty company in initial disclosures was harmless because plaintiffs mentioned president of company and defendants conducted no discovery of company C. holding that statements of a company vice president were admissible against the principal owner of the company under fedrevid 801d2d as an admission made by the partys agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment D. holding that a disclosure by a vice president and sales manager of a corporation did not constitute waiver because he did not seek authorization from the board of directors E. holding that the responsibility of another did not absolve the plaintiff of his own responsibility where the plaintiff helped incorporate the company served as vice president and president owned varying levels of stock and possessed authority to hire and fire

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the responsibility of another did not absolve the plaintiff of his own responsibility where the plaintiff helped incorporate the company served as vice president and president owned varying levels of stock and possessed authority to hire and fire
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: develop , support or use software , devices , scripts , robots , or any other means or processes ( including crawlers , browser plugins and add-ons , or any other technology or manual work ) to scrape the services or otherwise copy profiles and other data from the services ;

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: and interest. Because the City can afford complete relief, ADOR is not a necessary party. ¶24 Taxpayer contends, however, that it has never been given assurances that the actual funds are in the City’s possession and not ADOR’s. But, as ADOR points out, this contention is irrelevant. It is undisputed that ADOR collected the municipal tax revenues on the City’s behalf. The tax collection agreement obligates ADOR to pay the collected revenues to the City on a weekly basis. Because payment to the agent constitutes payment to the principal, as a matter of law, the City has received the disputed tax payments and is liable. See Ariz. Storage & Distrib. Co. v. Rynning, 37 Ariz. 232, 236-37, 293 P. 16, 17-18 (1930); cf. Maricopa County v. Hodgin, 46 Ariz. 247, 251-52, 50 P.2d 15, 16 (1935) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 25 Furthermore, we have found no law or Options: A. holding that the tax was indirect even though the recipient could not shift the tax to others B. holding that it was not the taxpayers responsibility to pursue the different tax units to which the illegally levied county tax was proportioned as the taxpayer was entitled to recover the full amount of the tax from the county the collecting entity C. holding a county taxpayer has standing to bring a declaratory decree and injunctive action against public officials of the county when the action seeks to enjoin the grant of certain tax exemptions given to other taxpayers in the county on the ground that such exemptions violate specific limitations on the countys authority to grant tax exemptions imposed by the florida constitution D. holding that the county had no standing to sue the state to recover taxes illegally obtained from citizens unless the money belongs to the county E. holding that the university was not a political subdivision of the state because it had no power to tax or cause taxes to be levied

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that it was not the taxpayers responsibility to pursue the different tax units to which the illegally levied county tax was proportioned as the taxpayer was entitled to recover the full amount of the tax from the county the collecting entity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Note is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the balance of this Note shall remain in effect, and if any provision is inapplicable to any Person or circumstance, it shall nevertheless remain applicable to all other Persons and circumstances. If it shall be found that any interest or other amount deemed interest due hereunder violates the applicable law governing usury, the applicable rate of interest due hereunder shall automatically be lowered to equal the maximum rate of interest permitted under applicable law. The Borrower covenants (to the extent that it may lawfully do so) that it shall not at any time insist upon, plead, or in any manner whatsoever claim or take the benefit or advantage of, any stay, extension or usury law or other law which would prohibit or forgive the Borrower from paying all or any portion of the principal of or interest on this Note as contemplated herein, wherever enacted, now or at any time hereafter in force, or which may affect the covenants or the performance of this Note, and the Borrower (to the extent it may lawfully do so) hereby expressly waives all benefits or advantage of any such law, and covenants that it will not, by resort to any such law, hinder, delay or impede the execution of any power herein granted to the Lender, but will suffer and permit the execution of every such law as though no such law has been enacted.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless terminated earlier under Section 5, 6 or 7 below, an Awardee’s rights under this Award Agreement with respect to the PSAs under this Award Agreement shall terminate at the time the PSAs are converted into Common Shares and distributed to Awardee.

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: Kowal v. MCI Commc’ns Corp., 16 F.3d 1271, 1276 (D.C.Cir.1994). Nevertheless, the Court need not accept inferences drawn by the plaintiff if those inferences are unsupported by facts alleged in the complaint, nor must the Court accept plaintiffs legal conclusions. See id.; Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C.Cir.2002). In ruling upon a motion to dismiss, a court may ordinarily consider only “the facts alleged in the complaint, documents attached as exhibits or incorporated by reference in the complaint, and matters about which the Court may take judicial notice.” Gustave-Schmidt v. Chao, 226 F.Supp.2d 191, 196 (D.D.C.2002) (citations omitted); see also EEOC v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial Schl., 117 F.3d 621, 624 (D.C.Cir.1997). In this case, the Court ma 505 (D.C.2002) (<HOLDING>); see also U.S. ex rel. Yesudian v. Howard Options: A. holding where employee handbook and employment offer letter disclaimed creation of employment contract that employees testimony of his understanding of terms of agreement did not raise fact issue of specific express and clear agreement contradicting the express provisions of the personnel manual and the employment offer letter B. holding that an atwill employment relationship is contractual and may serve as a predicate contract for a 1981 claim C. holding that employee handbook did not give rise to implied contract where it stated that it was not a contract and that employment was terminable at will D. holding that language in employee handbook stating that it was not to be considered as creating terms and conditions of an employment contract and that the employment relationship was employment atwill was sufficiently explicit to preclude the creation of implied contractual obligations as a matter of law E. holding that employee guidebook did not create an implied employment contract as it contained a clearlystated boldfaced disclaimer and statement that employment was atwill

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that language in employee handbook stating that it was not to be considered as creating terms and conditions of an employment contract and that the employment relationship was employment atwill was sufficiently explicit to preclude the creation of implied contractual obligations as a matter of law
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: defendant’s objection asserted only federal constitution as grounds). In Wyborny v. State, the defendant failed to state any grounds for the objection to the State’s question; however, the State’s question specifically referenced an event that occurred post-arrest and pre-Miranda. Id., 209 S.W.3d 285, 288, 290 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). This Court held that the specificity of the State’s question cured the defendant’s failure to state the Texas Constitution as grounds; thus, the defendant’s objection preserved the state constitutional challenge for appeal. See id. at 290. The court explained, “[T]he objection was specific enough to have put the trial court on notice of [defendant’s complaint].” Id.; see Lankston v. State, 827 S.W.2d 907, 910-11 (Tex.Crim.App.1992) (<HOLDING>); Samuel v. State, 688 S.W.2d 492, 495-96 Options: A. holding that parties waived any choice of law objection by not raising an objection B. holding an issue was preserved in part because the trial court immediately understood the basis of the objection C. holding that defendants general objection to states specific questions regarding defendants failure to appear before grand jury was sufficient to put trial court on notice of objection based on defendants constitutional right to remain silent D. holding that although the defendant had preserved his objection to the constitutionality of a mental state requirement he had not preserved another constitutional objection E. holding that error was preserved by running objection because of defendants immediate objection to states specific question in combination with trial courts comments showing that it understood nature of defendants objection

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that error was preserved by running objection because of defendants immediate objection to states specific question in combination with trial courts comments showing that it understood nature of defendants objection