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: of the state’s wage law. Although Section 31-72 does not specify the standard governing doubling of damages, the Connecticut Appellate Court has required a showing of bad faith or willfulness before the court may exercise its discretion and award double actual damages. See e.g., Anderson v. Schieffer, 35 Conn.App. 31, 645 A.2d 549 (1994). In contrast, the damages available under § 4852d are nondiscretionary once plaintiff demonstrates a knowing violation. The Court sees no basis to elevate the scienter requirement where the statute clearly establishes treble damages shall be awarded when a person knowingly violates the statute, without regard to their motivation or bad faith in doing so. Cf. McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co., 486 U.S. 128, 133, 108 S.Ct. 1677, 100 L.Ed.2d 115 (1988) (<HOLDING>). This interpretation of the statute’s plain Options: A. holding that the plain language of the fair labor standards acts willful liquidated damages standard requires that the employer either knew or showed reckless disregard for the matter of whether its conduct was prohibited by the statute without regard to the outrageousness of the conduct at issue B. holding that the language of the statute and the courts duty to apply the statute as written requires the court to interpret the statute to apply when the prisoner is sentenced without regard to the institution where the prisoner is incarcerated after the sentencing C. holding the employees complaints must give adequate notice to the employer that the employee is complaining of conduct prohibited by title vii D. holding that the knowledge required by 14202 of the mcdca refers to actual knowledge or reckless disregard as to the falsity of the information or the existence of the right E. holding that the government did not have to prove that the defendant knew that his acts violated the clean water act but merely that he was aware of the conduct that resulted in the permits violation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the plain language of the fair labor standards acts willful liquidated damages standard requires that the employer either knew or showed reckless disregard for the matter of whether its conduct was prohibited by the statute without regard to the outrageousness of the conduct at issue
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 has been duly and validly authorized, executed and delivered on behalf of the Company and shall constitute the legal, valid and binding obligations of the Company enforceable against the Company in accordance with their respective terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by general principles of equity or to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, liquidation and other similar laws relating to, or affecting generally, the enforcement of applicable creditors’ rights and remedies. The execution, delivery and performance by the Company of this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements and the consummation by the Company of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby will not: (i) conflict with, or constitute a default (or an event which with notice or lapse of time or both would become a default) under, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation of, any agreement, indenture or instrument to which the Company is a party or by which it is bound; or (ii) result in a violation of any law, rule, regulation, order, judgment or decree (including federal and state securities or “blue sky” laws) applicable to the Company, provided Exchange Approval (as hereinafter defined) is obtained in a timely manner.

assistant: Authorizations
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 acknowledge and agree that, except as set forth herein, this Agreement supersedes any and all prior or contemporaneous oral and/or written agreements between you and the Company, and sets forth the entire agreement between you and the Company. No variations or modifications hereof shall be deemed valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties hereto. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been made in the State of California and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of California without giving effect to conflict of law principles. To ensure the timely and economical resolution of disputes that arise in connection with this Agreement, you and the Company agree that any and all disputes, claims, or causes of action arising from or relating to the enforcement, breach, performance or interpretation of this Agreement shall be resolved to the fullest extent permitted by law by final, binding and confidential arbitration, by a single arbitrator, in San Diego County, California, conducted by Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. (“JAMS”) under the applicable JAMS employment rules, or other arbitrator or arbitration rules to which you and the Company mutually agree. The arbitrator shall: (a) have the authority to compel adequate discovery for the resolution of the dispute and to award such relief as would otherwise be permitted by law; and (b) issue a confidential written arbitration decision, to include the arbitrator’s essential findings and conclusions and a statement of the award. The arbitrator shall be authorized to award any or all remedies that you or the Company would be entitled to seek in a court of law. The parties to this agreement shall split equally all arbitrator and arbitration administrative fees. In the event that either party brings an action to enforce or effect its rights under or relating to this Agreement the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with such an action. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to prevent either you or the Company from obtaining injunctive relief in court to prevent irreparable harm pending the conclusion of any such arbitration. The provisions of this Agreement are severable, and if for any reason any part hereof shall be found to be unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be enforced in full. The Company agrees that any person or entity making an inquiry concerning you or your employment with the Company shall be informed that it is the policy of the Company to make no comment on the performance of its employees other than to confirm the employee’s period of employment and title. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if you direct a prospective employer to contact either Leslie Cross or Donald Williams, the Company agrees that either of Messrs. Cross or Williams shall provide a reference to the prospective employer.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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: § 301). The Clean Water Act also establishes a procedure by which a state, rather than the EPA, may administer its own NPDES program regulating discharges into navigable waters within the state. Once approved by the EPA, the state may issue NPDES permits to insure compliance with both federal and state limitations. 33 U.S.C. § 1342(b)(1)(A). The citizen suit provision of the Clean Water Act expressly provides that an effluent standard or limitation under the Clean Water Act includes, among other things, “an effluent limitation or other limitation” issued under 33 U.S.C. § 1311 or “a permit or condition thereof’ issued under 33 U.S.C. § 1342, both provisions of the Clean Water Act that recognize state standards and limitations. 33 U.S.C. § 1365(f)(2) & (6) 1572, 1581-82 (N.D.Ga.1995) (<HOLDING>); see also Environmental Protection Agency v. Options: A. holding cwa does not allow citizen suit against a past polluter for the ongoing migrating leachate plume B. holding that a limited liability company is a citizen of any state of which a member of the company is a citizen C. holding that the cwa authorizes citizen suits for the enforcement of all conditions of npdes permits including those imposed by georgia law D. holding that statute authorizing citizen suits against those alleged to be in violation of the clean water act cwa conferred no jurisdiction over cases based on wholly past violations E. holding that 6905a of the cwa prevents any under claims under rcra that would be barred under the clean water acts cwa npdes permit shield

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the cwa authorizes citizen suits for the enforcement of all conditions of npdes permits including those imposed by georgia 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All payments to be made by the Borrowers shall be made without condition or deduction for any counterclaim, defense, recoupment or setoff. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all payments by the Borrowers hereunder shall be made to the Agent, for the account of the respective Lenders to which such payment is owed, at the Agent’s Office in Dollars and in immediately available funds not later than 2:00 p.m. on the date specified herein. The Agent will, subject to Section 2.14 hereof, promptly distribute to each Lender its Applicable Percentage (or other applicable share as provided herein) of such payment in like funds as received by wire transfer to such Lender’s Lending Office. All payments received by the Agent after 2:00 p.m. shall, at the option of the Agent, be deemed received on the next succeeding Business Day and any applicable interest or fee shall continue to accrue. If any payment to be made by the Borrowers shall come due on a day other than a Business Day, payment shall be made on the next following Business Day (other than with respect to payment of a LIBOR Rate Loan), and such extension of time shall be reflected in computing interest or fees, as the case may be.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: it is considered improper for a chapter 7 trustee to liquidate the asset. See e.g., In re Preston Lumber Corp., 199 B.R. 415 (Bankr.N.D.Cal.1996). While the trustee’s motion to sell does not involve the sale of fully encumbered property, the property is being liquidated for the benefit of just one creditor&—the holder of the domestic support obligation claim&—rather than unsecured creditors generally. Given that the Madera County Child Support Department is collecting the claim for the benefit of the claim holder, it is clear that the assistance of the trustee, which would come at a price, is unnecessary. By enforcing the domestic support obligation in state court, the trustee’s administrative expenses will be avoided. Cf. Williams v. California 1st Bank, 859 F.2d 664 (9th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). For these reasons, the trustee’s objections Options: A. holding that the claims to a statutory benefit had not yet vested when the legislature eliminated the benefit B. holding that it is improper for a trustee to liquidate claims that benefit only select creditors with the only benefit to the estate being the recoupment of administrative costs C. recognizing that the incremental costs of appointment of a trustee typically outweigh the benefit that may accrue to the debtors estate D. holding that the avoidance powers provide for recovery only if the recovery is for the benefit of the estate E. holding that there is a difference between a debtor attempting to pursue an action for his own benefit and a trustee pursuing an action for the benefit of the creditors

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that it is improper for a trustee to liquidate claims that benefit only select creditors with the only benefit to the estate being the recoupment of administrative costs
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: Interest on this Debenture shall commence accruing on the Issuance Date, shall accrue daily at the Interest Rate on the outstanding Principal amount from time to time, shall be computed on the basis of a 365-day year comprised of twelve (12) months and shall be payable in arrears upon the earlier of (i) the last day of June, September, December and March, commencing on the Issuance Date, until the principal hereof shall have become due and payable and, (ii) the date of conversion into Common Stock in accordance with Section 5 herein below.

assistant: 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of whether the County also possesses statutory authority to condemn the same property. We therefore reverse the decision of the court of appeals insofar as it held that CDOT lacked statutory authority to condemn the disputed parcels pursuant to section 43-1-208(3), and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. II. Analysis We have long held that in Colorado the power of eminent domain lies dormant in the state until the legislature speaks. Potashnik v. Pub. Serv. Co., 126 Colo. 98, 101, 247 P.2d 137, 138 (1952). Accordingly, a party may not condemn private property without demonstrating that the taking has been statutorily authorized, either expressly or implicitly. See State Dep’t of Highways v. Denver and Rio Grande W. R.R. Co., 789 P.2d 1088, 1092 (Colo.1990) (<HOLDING>). Thus, in order for the Petitioners to condemn Options: A. holding that the department of highways did not have statutory authority to condemn a private way of necessity over railroad tracks on behalf of a landlocked ranch operator B. recognizing a selfevaluative privilege to railroad companys investigation of an accident in light of the publics stake in the improvement of railroad safety C. holding that department does not have independent authority to impose device in absence of court order D. holding that director of police department does not have final policymaking authority in miamidade county despite having some discretionary authority E. holding over

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the department of highways did not have statutory authority to condemn a private way of necessity over railroad tracks on behalf of a landlocked ranch operator
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 provision of this Agreement may be changed or terminated except by a writing signed by the party or parties to be charged therewith. Unless expressly so provided, no party to this Agreement will be liable for the performance of any other party’s obligations hereunder. Any party hereto may waive compliance by the others with any of the terms, provisions and conditions set forth herein; provided , however , that any such waiver shall be in writing specifically setting forth those provisions waived thereby. No such waiver shall be deemed to constitute or imply waiver of any other teen, provision or condition of this Agreement. Except as expressly provided on the first page of this Agreement, no party may assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement to any other person or entity without the prior written consent of the other parties.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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 capitalization of the Company is as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g) , which Schedule 3.1(g) shall also include the number of shares of Common Stock owned beneficially, and of record, by Affiliates of the Company as of the date hereof and shall include a schedule of shares of Common Stock available for reservation and issuance upon conversion and exercise of the Securities prior to Shareholder Approval. Except as disclosed on Schedule 3.1(g ), the Company has not issued any capital stock since its most recently filed periodic or current report under the Exchange Act, other than pursuant to the exercise of employee stock options under the Company’s stock option plans, the issuance of shares of Common Stock to employees pursuant to the Company’s employee stock purchase plans and pursuant to the conversion and/or exercise of Common Stock Equivalents outstanding as of the date of the most recently filed periodic report under the Exchange Act. No Person has any right of first refusal, preemptive right, right of participation, or any similar right to participate in the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. Except as a result of the purchase and sale of the Securities, and as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g ), there are no outstanding options, warrants, scrip rights to subscribe to, calls or commitments of any character whatsoever relating to, or securities, rights or obligations convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for, or giving any Person any right to subscribe for or acquire any shares of Common Stock, or contracts, commitments, understandings or arrangements by which the Company or any Subsidiary is or may become bound to issue additional shares of Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents. The issuance and sale of the Securities will not obligate the Company to issue shares of Common Stock or other securities to any Person (other than the Purchasers) and will not result in a right of any holder of Company securities to adjust the exercise, conversion, exchange or reset price under any of such securities. All of the outstanding shares of capital stock of the Company are duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable, have been issued in compliance with all federal and state securities laws (or the applicable statute of limitations has expired), and none of such outstanding shares was issued in violation of any preemptive rights or similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. No further approval or authorization of any stockholder or the Board of Directors or others is required for the issuance and sale of the Securities. There are no stockholders agreements, voting agreements or other similar agreements with respect to the Company’s capital stock to which the Company is a party or, to the knowledge of the Company, between or among any of the Company’s stockholders.

assistant: Capitalization
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: “[tjhere is little tactical wisdom in counsel resting on his hands and assuming the government would help make the defense case for him”); Barrow, 398 F.3d at 605 (rejecting claim that counsel’s failure to present any evidence was legitimate strategic move). In any event, the “strategy” failed, as a competent attorney might expect: the officers unanimously and consistently stated that they had not coerced Bynum. And without the admission to coercion that Graddick had hoped the officers would give, he was left with no evidence that Bynum’s confessions were coerced. A motion to suppress allegedly involuntary confessions cannot succeed without at least some evidence that the confessions were coerced. See Schneckloth v. Bustamante, 412 U.S. 218, 225-26, 93 S.Ct. 2041, 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973) (<HOLDING>); Conner v. McBride, 375 F.3d 643, 651 (7th Options: A. holding that indiana courts will only engage in statutory interpretation if the language of the statute is ambiguous B. holding that police failure to inform the accused of his attorneys attempts to contact him and misstatements to the attorney as to whether the accused was at the police station did not violate the accuseds due process rights C. holding that confession is involuntary only if police coercion or overreaching overbore the accuseds will and caused the confession D. recognizing that the accuseds right to be represented by counsel is a fundamental component of our criminal justice system E. holding that an award of restitution is only for the loss caused by the specific conduct that is the basis of the offense of conviction

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that confession is involuntary only if police coercion or overreaching overbore the accuseds will and caused the confession
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: cannot be a valid acceptance under § 2-207(1) and, accordingly, no contract was created by the exchange of forms. See Dorton, 453 F.2d at 1168 (“In order to fall within this [§ 2-207(1) ] proviso, it is not enough that an acceptance is expressly conditional on additional or different terms; rather, an acceptance must be expressly conditional on the offer- or’s assent to those terms.”). Christy argues that, if its customer acknowledgment form was not a valid acceptance of PCS’s offer, then the acknowledgment form was converted into a nonbinding counter-offer to which PCS in turn assented through its acceptance of and payment for the goods. See Brief of Appellant at 27-31; see also Construction Aggregates Corp. v. Hewitt-Robins, Inc., 404 F.2d 505 (7th Cir.1968) (Construction Aggregates) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 921, 89 S.Ct. 1774, 23 Options: A. holding that a valid contract requires acceptance of an offer B. holding that purported acceptance was a counteroffer when it conditioned settlement upon satisfaction of liens C. holding that buyers retention and use of boiler was an act inconsistent with sellers ownership and constituted acceptance precluding rejection D. holding that although sellers acknowledgment was not valid acceptance of buyers offer under 22071 buyers subsequent acceptance of and payment for goods along with buyers objection to a particular term within counteroffer constituted assent to remaining terms of counteroffer E. holding that purported acceptance was a counteroffer when response required additional act of resolving all liens

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that although sellers acknowledgment was not valid acceptance of buyers offer under 22071 buyers subsequent acceptance of and payment for goods along with buyers objection to a particular term within counteroffer constituted assent to remaining terms of counteroffer
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 Note has been duly executed and delivered by the Maker. This Note constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Maker, enforceable against the Maker in accordance with its terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by applicable Debtor Relief Laws.

assistant: Binding Effects
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 Employee shall report to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company and any other executive officers as may be determined from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Company. The Employee shall perform all of the normal and customary responsibilities, duties and authorities customarily accorded to, and expected of the position of a Chief Science Officer, and such other reasonable duties as may be designated by the Chief Executive Officer or the Board of Directors (“Board”) of the Company from time to time. Services performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed at such place(s) and times as shall be mutually agreeable to the Company and Employee and during such hours so as not to conflict with Employee’s other employment at The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”). The Employee and the Company shall meet on a quarterly basis to determine such performance of services for the next quarterly period. The Employee shall, in good faith, make best efforts to attend meetings of the Board of Directors of the Company, and/or tradeshows and other relevant conferences on behalf of the Company as the Company may reasonably request up to one year in advance of such events. The Company agrees that the Employee shall not be obligated to attend any such events following the termination of his employment with the Company, regardless of the reasons for such termination. The specific services that are the subject of this Agreement, and any additions or modifications to the limits contained in this Section, shall be described on Schedule 1 attached hereto, to be determined in good faith by the parties within two months of the date hereof. The Company agrees that the Employee shall not have to perform any services for the Company if the performance of such services may conflict with the Employee’s obligations or duties to MIT. The Employee agrees to comply with all applicable policies and rules of Company, provided that such compliance does not conflict with the Employee’s obligations to MIT; provided further that the Employee shall provide prompt written notice to the Company of any change from the Employee’s obligations to MIT as of the date of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the case doctrine applies when a defendant is granted a new trial and precludes the defendant from re-litigating the admissibility of evidence when the same issue was already raised and previously decided adversely to the defendant. Commonwealth v. McEnany, 732 A.2d 1263, 1267 (Pa.Super.1999), appeal granted, 562 Pa. 667, 753 A.2d 816 (2000), appeal dismissed as improvidently granted, 565 Pa. 138, 771 A.2d 1260 (2001). ¶ 9 Under Pennsylvania law, the doctrine of law of the case does not have an absolute preclusive effect. Benson v. Benson, 425 Pa.Super. 215, 624 A.2d 644, 647 (1993), appeal denied, 536 Pa. 637, 639 A.2d 22 (1994). Most jurisdictions similarly hold the law of the case doctrine is not an absolute rule. See, e.g., State v. Moeck, 280 Wis.2d 277, 695 N.W.2d 783, 789 (2005) (<HOLDING>); Owen v. State, 862 So.2d 687, 694 (Fla.2003) Options: A. holding that jurisdiction must be resolved before applying the act of state doctrine because that doctrine is a substantive rule of law B. holding that the law of the case doctrine is not a fixed rule that prevents a federal court from determining the question of its own subject matter jurisdiction in a given case C. holding that the decision of the appellate court establishes the law of the case and it must be followed by the trial court on remand D. holding law of case doctrine is not absolute rule that must be inexorably followed in every case E. holding law of case doctrine is procedural and does not go to jurisdiction of court

assistant: The best answer is D. holding law of case doctrine is not absolute rule that must be inexorably followed in every case
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: Whether or not the Transactions are consummated, and except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, each Party to this Agreement will bear its respective fees, costs and expenses incurred in connection with the preparation, negotiation, execution and performance of this Agreement or the Transactions (including legal, accounting and other professional fees).

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: as saying, “[m]y feeling is, if I’m going to sentence someone to state prison or county jail it should always be followed by probation.” Martin v. State, 804 So.2d 360, 362 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). When the court indicated that such a motion must be in writing, defense counsel asked for time to file a written motion. The court denied the request and sentenced him to a five year prison term. Subsequently, Tyler filed the motion to recuse in -writing. The court denied the motion, finding that it was legally insufficient. The court also denied a motion to correct sentence, which was based on the motion to disqualify. Denial of a motion for continuance for the purpose of filing a written motion to recuse is an abuse of discretion. See Reynolds v. State, 568 So.2d 76, 78 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)(<HOLDING>). Clearly, an oral motion is insufficient. Options: A. holding that trial court impliedly ruled on motion for continuance by granting motion for summary judgment when appellant filed motion for continuance two days before summary judgment hearing B. holding that appellant did not preserve error because he failed to obtain ruling on motion for continuance C. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying motion for continuance when not in proper affidavit form D. holding it was error for trial court not to grant a continuance when appellant moved in open court to disqualify judge or in the alternative for a continuance to file a proper motion E. holding the record open for additional testimony amounts to a continuance

assistant: The best answer is D. holding it was error for trial court not to grant a continuance when appellant moved in open court to disqualify judge or in the alternative for a continuance to file a proper motion
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 Release will be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, administrators, representatives, executors, successors and assigns, and will inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective heirs, administrators, representatives, executors, successors and assigns.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice required or permitted under this Agreement shall be deemed given when delivered personally, through Ambac’s stock compensation administration system or when deposited in a United States Post Office, postage prepaid, addressed, as appropriate, to the Company at its principal offices, to the Participant at the Participant’s address as last known by the Company or, in either case, such other address as one party may designate in writing to the other.

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: If any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect by a judicial body, such holding shall not affect the validity and enforceability of any other provisions hereof. Further, should any provisions within this Agreement ever be reformed or rewritten by a judicial body, such provisions as so rewritten shall be binding upon the Parties hereto.

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: The Company and the Subsidiaries have, or have rights to use, all patents, patent applications, trademarks, trademark applications, service marks, trade names, trade secrets, inventions, copyrights, licenses and other intellectual property rights and similar rights necessary or required for use in connection with their respective businesses as described in the SEC Reports and which the failure to so have could have a Material Adverse Effect (collectively, the “ Intellectual Property Rights ”). None of, and neither the Company nor any Subsidiary has received a notice (written or otherwise) that any of, the Intellectual Property Rights has expired, terminated or been abandoned, or is expected to expire or terminate or be abandoned, within two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, except where such action would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. Neither the Company nor any Subsidiary has received, since the date of the latest audited financial statements included within the SEC Reports, a written notice of a claim or otherwise has any knowledge that the Intellectual Property Rights violate or infringe upon the rights of any Person, except as could not have or reasonably be expected to not have a Material Adverse Effect. To the knowledge of the Company, all such Intellectual Property Rights are enforceable and there is no existing infringement by another Person of any of the Intellectual Property Rights. The Company and its Subsidiaries have taken reasonable security measures to protect the secrecy, confidentiality and value of all of their intellectual properties, except where failure to do so could not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. The Company has no knowledge of any facts that would preclude it from having valid license rights or clear title to the Intellectual Property Rights. The Company has no knowledge that it lacks or will be unable to obtain any rights or licenses to use all Intellectual Property Rights that are necessary to conduct its business.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties agree that irreparable damage would occur if any provision of this Agreement were not performed in accordance with the terms hereof and that the parties will be entitled to specific performance of the terms hereof, in addition to any other remedy to which they are entitled 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: Shares issued pursuant to any Restricted Stock Award may (but need not) be made subject to Vesting Conditions based upon the satisfaction of such Service requirements, conditions, restrictions or performance criteria, including, without limitation, Performance Goals as described in Section 10.4, as shall be established by the Committee and set forth in the Award Agreement evidencing such Award. During any period in which shares acquired pursuant to a Restricted Stock Award remain subject to Vesting Conditions, such shares may not be sold, exchanged, transferred, pledged, assigned or otherwise dispo sed of other than pursuant to a Change in Control or as provided in Section 8.8. The Committee, in its discretion, may provide in any Award Agreement evidencing a Restricted Stock Award that, if the satisfaction of Vesting Conditions with respect to any shares subject to such Restricted Stock Award would otherwise occur on a day on which the sale of such shares would violate the provisions of the Trading Compliance Policy, then satisfaction of the Vesting Conditions automatically shall be determined on the next trading day on which the sale of such shares would not violate the Trading Compliance Policy. Upon request by the Company, each Participant shall execute any agreement evidencing such transfer restrictions prior to the receipt of shares of Stock hereunder and shall promptly present to the Company any and all certificates representing shares of Stock acquired hereunder for the placement on such certificates of appropriate legends evidencing any such transfer restrictions.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: issue of fact that the denial of ice demonstrated “deliberate ind ed by the refusal to give him ice. He claims that he suffered severe dehydration; an unrelenting pounding in his head brought on by migraine headaches; and a burning sensation in his throat, chest, and stomach. Thus, Plaintiff offered sufficient evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. The district court erred by granting summary judgment to Defendants on this claim. B. Retaliation. Plaintiff failed to introduce evidence raising a genuine issue of material fact as to whether he was sanctioned for exercising his constitutional rights to file an administrative complaint. See Pratt v. Rowland, 65 F.3d 802, 806-07 (9th Cir. 1995) (<HOLDING>). The administrative complaint that Plaintiff Options: A. holding that a plaintiff must demonstrate a direct causal link between the municipal action and the deprivation of federal rights B. holding that plaintiff cannot be the only link between the defendant and the forum C. holding that to prevail on a 1983 retaliation claim a prisoner must submit evidence establishing a link between the prisoners exercise of constitutional rights and the alleged retaliatory action D. holding that a prima facie case of retaliation requires a causal link between the employees protected activity and the employers adverse employment action E. holding that to prevail on a 1983 claim a plaintiff must allege that the defendant acted under color of state law in other words that there was state action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that to prevail on a 1983 retaliation claim a prisoner must submit evidence establishing a link between the prisoners exercise of constitutional rights and the alleged retaliatory action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Grant Notice specifies the Performance Goals required to be attained during the Performance Period for the Performance Units to vest. The Award shall vest on the date the Company’s Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) certifies attainment of the Performance Goals set forth in the Grant Notice have been attained provided that the Participant is actively employed by the Company or an Affiliate on the measurement date as of which the Performance Goal is certified or such earlier date set forth in the Grant Notice. For purposes of this Award Agreement, an “Affiliate” of the Company is an individual or entity that directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls, or is controlled by, or is under common control with, the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: been prejudicial, and must have “affected the outcome of the [trial] court proceedings.” United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 734, 113 S. Ct. 1770, 123 L. Ed. 2d 508 (1993). III. ANALYSIS A. Denial of Mistrial Turbe argues that the Superior Court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a mi resulted in sufficient prejudice to warrant a mistrial, we evaluate: (1) the scope of the comments within the context of the whole trial; (2) the effect of any curative instructions given; and (3) the weight of the evidence against the defendant. See United States v. Gambone, 314 F.3d 163, 179 (3d Cir. 2003). Curative instructions, which the jury is presumed to follow, are generally sufficient to overcome improper statements. See United States v. Hakim, 344 F.3d 324, 329-31 (3d Cir. 2003) (<HOLDING>). Here, the prosecutor asked two improper Options: A. holding that the trial judges misconduct at trial did not prejudice the defendant in light of the courts curative instructions B. holding that the district courts decision to delay jury instructions and deliberations did not warrant a presumption of prejudice C. holding that when an objection is overruled failing to request curative instructions or a mistrial does not result in waiver D. recognizing that use of curative or limiting instructions is within the district courts discretion E. holding that a thirtyminute delay in providing curative instructions to a jury for improper conduct did not result in prejudice against the defendant

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a thirtyminute delay in providing curative instructions to a jury for improper conduct did not result in prejudice against the defendant
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: Briggs is not substantially different from that in Brooks, quoted above. Compare Briggs, 666 N.W.2d at 578-80, with Brooks, 604 N.W.2d at 349-50. Briggs suggests that “sufficient sureties” means a “defendant was given the right to be bailed, subject to the state’s analysis of a surety’s sufficiency to provide adequate recompense if the prisoner did not show for his judicial proceedings.” 666 N.W.2d at 582. As explained above, this is a dubious proposition. ¶24 Perhaps more problematically for the State, the Briggs court “[ultimately” believed that “the core purpose of the clause was to guarantee a bailable individual access to a surety of some form.” Id. at 581. It concluded that a cash-only bail “ cash bail violates Minnesota’s sufficient sureties clause); Golden, 546 So. 2d at 502-03 (<HOLDING>). Nonetheless, the discussion in these cases is Options: A. holding that the statute as applied violates the commerce clause B. holding that rluipa violates establishment clause C. holding allcash bail violates louisianas sufficient sureties clause D. holding that 16913a violates the commerce clause E. holding an allcash bail violated ohios sufficient sureties clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding allcash bail violates louisianas sufficient sureties clause
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: 9, (Vernon Supp. 1995), which provides that the judge shall direct the preparation of a report on “the criminal and social history of the defendant and any other information relating to the defendant....” Appellant responds that the admissibility of the extraneous offense evidence in this case is governed not by article 42.12, but by article 37.07, which specifically made such evidence inadmissible to the of fense in this case. We agree with the appellant. We note that article 37.07 is the more specific statute concerning the admissibility of evidence at the punishment stage of trial. Moreover, it has been held in other contexts that article 37.07 controls over article 42.12 in the event of a conflict. Turcio v. State, 791 S.W.2d 188, 191 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1990, pet. refd) (<HOLDING>); Stewart v. State, 732 S.W.2d 398, 401 Options: A. holding that preparation of a psi report is discretionary under article 3707 rather than mandatory under article 4212 B. holding that when the type of insurance procured is not listed in article 2104 the article does not apply C. recognizing one reason for affirmative deadly weapon finding under article 4212 is to act as a deterrent D. holding same conduct can be used as element of offense and also serve as basis for a deadly weapon finding under article 4212 section 3ga2 and explaining that to hold otherwise would conflict with the unambiguous language of article 4212 section 3ga2 E. holding wjhere an appeal is taken the terms of probation do not commence until the mandate of this court is issued and citing former section 8 of article 4212 texas code of criminal procedure

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that preparation of a psi report is discretionary under article 3707 rather than mandatory under article 4212