flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the evidence must show that each defendant knew, or had reason to know, that his benefits were probably dependent upon the success of the entire operation. Typically, the inference of an overall agreement is drawn from proof of a single objective ... or from proof that the key participants and the method of operation remained constant throughout the conspiracy. The inference that a defendant had reason to believe that his benefits were dependent upon the success of the entire venture may be drawn from proof that the co-conspirators knew of each other’s participation or actually benefitted from the activities of his coconspirators. 189 F.3d at 1080 (internal citations, alterations, and quotation marks omitted); see also United States v. Bibbero, 749 F.2d 581, 587 (9th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). Appellants assert that instead of the single Options: A. holding that the relevant factors include the nature of the scheme the identity of the participants the quality frequency and duration of each conspirators transactions and the commonality of time and goals B. holding that duration of spousal maintenance award is measured by the duration of the period of incapacity and survives the death of the obligor C. holding that the relevant time of inquiry is the date of the filing of the complaint D. holding that the relevant time is the time of the employment decision E. holding that when evaluating a settlement agreement the court is not to substitute its judgment for that of the parties nor is it to run consideration of the adequacy of the settlement into a trial or a rehearsal of the trial rather the cjourts responsibility is to reach an intelligent and objective opinion of the ultimate success should the claims be litigated and to form an educated estimate of the complexity expense and likely duration of such litigation and all other factors relevant to a full and fair assessment of the wisdom of the proposed compromise

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the relevant factors include the nature of the scheme the identity of the participants the quality frequency and duration of each conspirators transactions and the commonality of time and goals
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: investors to testify as to the value of their investment); Neff v. Kehoe, 708 F.2d 639, 643-44 (11th Cir.1983) (reversing, in an action alleging misrepresentations in sale of a coin collection, the exclusion of testimony of the plaintif&'buyer, • who was determined competent to give lay opinion testimony as to the value of the coins, even though such testimony was self-serving and unsupported by other evidence); Garis v. Massey, 270 Ark. 646, 606 S.W.2d 109, 112 (App.1980) (allowing owner of similar pr etti Corp. of America, 762 F.2d 843, 845-46 (10th Cir.1985) (permitting admission of testimony as to lost future profits from company’s president/treasurer with personal knowledge of company’s operations, sales, and profits); State v. Johnson, 221 Mont. 503, 719 P.2d 1248, 1256-57 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Schmidt v. J.C. Robinson Seed Co., 220 Neb. Options: A. holding police officer had probable cause to believe defendant was operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol B. holding that it was error to allow a police officer who was admitted as a lay witness after a prosecution motion to admit him as an expert was denied for lack of timeliness to give testimony as to a matter about which he had no personal knowledge C. holding that in order to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to call a witness to testify the claimant must allege 1 the identity of the potential witness 2 that the witness was available to testify at trial 3 the substance of the witnesss testimony and 4 an explanation of how the omission of the testimony prejudiced the case D. holding no abuse of discretion where judge had personal relationship with government witnesses but had not had contact with them for over ten years E. holding that in a prosecution for driving under the influence of alcohol a police officer was properly allowed to testify as a lay witness on the basis of his own experience as to what generally happens to a car when its power steering fails where he had worked on vehicles of all kinds for over ten years and had experienced power steering failure several times

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that in a prosecution for driving under the influence of alcohol a police officer was properly allowed to testify as a lay witness on the basis of his own experience as to what generally happens to a car when its power steering fails where he had worked on vehicles of all kinds for over ten years and had experienced power steering failure several times
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) there is no, and there has not been, any Action pending or, to the Seller’s Knowledge, threatened, against Seller with respect to the Business or, to the extent arising in connection with the Business, the Seller or directors, officers, agents, or other personnel of the Business, including without limitation any Action challenging, enjoining, or preventing this Agreement or the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and, to the Knowledge of Seller, there is no reasonable basis for any such Action; (b) Seller with respect to the Business is not or has not been subject to any Order other than Orders of general applicability and, to the Knowledge of Seller, there is no reasonable basis for any such Orders; and (c) Seller with respect to the Business has not been, or to Seller’s Knowledge, been threatened to be, a party or subject to any Action or Order relating to personal injury, death, or property or economic damage arising from the products of the Business and, to the Knowledge of Seller, there is no reasonable basis for any such Action or Order.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you also acknowledge that a variety of evernote actions may impair or prevent you from accessing your content or using the service at certain times and/or in the same way , for limited periods or permanently , and agree that evernote has no responsibility or liability as a result of any such actions or results , including , without limitation , for the deletion of , or failure to make available to you , any content .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Guarantor hereby irrevocably and unconditionally guarantees the payment to Lender of the Recourse Obligations of Borrower, as more particularly described in Section 9.21 of the Loan Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: concerning another in communications prehminary to a proposed judicial proceeding, or in the institution of or during the course and as part of, a judicial proceeding in which he participates, if the matter has some relation to the proceeding.” Restatement (Second) of Torts § 5 e of Civil Procedure expressly permits “[a] corporation [to] prosecute as plaintiff *** any small claims proceeding in any court of this State through any officer, director, manager, department manager or supervisor of the corporation, as though such corporation were appearing in its proper person.” 735 ILCS 5/2 — 416 (West 2000). The appellate court is divided as to whether section 2 — 416 or Supreme Court Rule 282(b) controls. Compare Woerner v. Seneca Petroleum, Inc., 175 Ill. App. 3d 329, 331 (3d Dist. 1988) (<HOLDING>), with Real Estate Buyer’s Agents, Inc. v. Options: A. holding that our courts are bound by the united states supreme courts interpretation of the federal constitution B. holding that it is not our prerogative to overrule or ignore clearly written decisions of our supreme court C. holding that rule stating defendants right to appeal felony sentence did not take away broader rights of review recognized by the supreme court before adoption of the rule D. holding that a delay of more than four years caused largely by the state making pretrial appeals was reasonable under the circumstances E. holding that our legislature preempted the question of pro se representation of corporations by enacting section 2 416 almost four years prior to the supreme courts adoption of rule 282

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that our legislature preempted the question of pro se representation of corporations by enacting section 2 416 almost four years prior to the supreme courts adoption of rule 282
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 Agreement is ultimately determined to be invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be deemed limited by construction in scope and effect to the minimum extent necessary to render the same valid and enforceable, and, in the event no such limiting construction is possible, such invalid or unenforceable provision shall be deemed severed from the Agreement without affecting the validity of any other provision hereof if the essential provisions of this Agreement for each party remain valid, binding and enforceable.

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 sole purpose of the Company and nature of the business to be conducted by the Company is to own, administer, operate, hold, develop, lease, manage, acquire, maintain, finance, refinance, renovate, market, sell and otherwise deal with and dispose of Company Assets. The Company shall have the power and authority to engage in any and all activities and take any and all actions necessary, appropriate, proper, advisable or convenient for, or incidental to, the furtherance of the purposes set forth in this Section 2.3 ; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not be construed as authorizing the Company to have any purpose or power, or to engage in any activity or take any action which is prohibited under Applicable Law. The purposes of the Company shall not be extended by implication, and any change to this Section 2.3 shall not be effective unless set forth in a written agreement among the Common Members in accordance with Section 12.13 .

assistant: Powers
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: exposure to conditions, which results, during the policy period, in bodily injury or property damage neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured. E.g., Plaintiffs Exh. 5. In analyzing an identical definition of “occurrence”, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) has held: “In deciding whether there was an occurrence ... the focus of the inquiry is on the property damage, asking whether it was expected or intended from the insured’s point of view.” Lumbermens Mut. Cas. v. Belleville Inds., 407 Mass. 675, 679, 555 N.E.2d 568, 571 (1990). The inquiry focuses on the foreseeability of the damage caused by the discharge, not on the foreseeability of the discharge itself. See A. Johnson & Co., Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Surety Co., 933 F.2d 66, 72 n. 9 (1st Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). The court must evaluate Lumber-mens’ duty to Options: A. holding that a similar exclusion denies coverage for property damage to the particular part of the real property that is the subject of the insureds work at the time of the damage if the damage arises out of those operations B. holding that under maine law the occurrence provision focuses on the property damage after the initial discharge and whether it was expected or intended from the insureds point of view C. holding that insurer who after being told of occurrence contacted insureds attorney for information should have issued reservation of rights letter within a reasonable time after it was informed of the occurrence D. holding that intentional acts do not exclude coverage under the occurrence language unless the injury was expected or intended E. holding that an objective standard to determine whether the injury was intended or expected would be inconsistent with insurance coverage for damage resulting from ordinary negligence

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that under maine law the occurrence provision focuses on the property damage after the initial discharge and whether it was expected or intended from the insureds point of view
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: lawful arrest. Regarding the § 1983 claim, they were instructed that appellant had to establish that the officers used “excessive and unnecessary force to arrest him and hold him thereafter.” The jury’s verdict can be reconciled only if a distinction can be made between unreasonable force and excessive or unnecessary force. Although appellant argues that the jury could have found a § 1983 violation based on the denial of medical assistance, the jury was not instructed on this theory, nor was it argued by appellant’s counsel, and appellant did not object to the lack of such an instruction. Similarly, there was no instruction on negligent misuse of authorized force, nor any claim that the officers’ actions were other than intentional. Cf. Wilson v. Beebe, 743 F.2d 342, 350 (6th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). A jury’s answers in a special verdict should Options: A. holding an agents false statements reckless because she was aware of the true facts surrounding the suspects arrest B. holding a suspects request for some time to think alone was not an invocation of the right to silence C. holding that a suspects ability to proffer an innocent explanation for the facts does not negate probable cause D. holding cocked pistol to suspects head showed reckless disregard for suspects rights E. holding that an officer may search a suspects vehicle incident to a lawful arrest

assistant: The best answer is D. holding cocked pistol to suspects head showed reckless disregard for suspects rights
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: (explaining that government regulation of private property may sometimes be so burdensome that it is the same as a direct appropriation). Regulatory takings are further subdivided into categorical (or per se) takings and non-categorical. Lingle, 544 U.S. at 538, 125 S.Ct. 2074. Regarding its real property, according to Consumers Energy, this case involves both a categorical and a non-categorical regulatory taking. Pl.’s Resp. at 11. There are two types of categorical takings. Lingle, 544 U.S. at 538, 125 S.Ct. 2074. In the first type, if a regulation subjects a property owner to a permanent physical invasion of property, no matter how minimal, the government must provide just compensation. Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419, 102 S.Ct. 3164, 73 L.Ed.2d 868 (1982) (<HOLDING>). Consumers Energy alleges that “the applicable Options: A. holding that new york law granting cable television companies right to place wires across private property worked a taking of private property B. holding that the physical occupation caused by the mandatory installation of cable television equipment was a compensable taking C. holding that a new york state law requiring the owner of an apartment building to allow the installation of cable equipment on the building which amounted to a few wires and a small box on the roof constituted a taking D. holding that a new york law which required a landlord to permit a cable television company to install its cable facilities on his property was a taking E. holding that a new york law requiring building owners to permit cable companies to install cable facilities on their premises constituted a taking

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a new york state law requiring the owner of an apartment building to allow the installation of cable equipment on the building which amounted to a few wires and a small box on the roof constituted a taking
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 base salary (the "Base Salary"), at the initial annual rate of not less than Six Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($625,000) will be paid to the Executive in regular installments in accordance with the Company's designated payroll schedule.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was performed for the purposes of both the guilt phase and the penalty phase. After the panel returned a guilty verdict, counsel discussed mitigation strategy with Wickline two or three times. Wickline did not want to speak with a psychiatrist or a probation officer or involve his family. Consequently, Wickline and his counsel reached the decision to focus on their strongest mitigating factor — that the Lerches facilitated the murders by participating in drug dealing and attempting a drug rip-off. Wickline made the final decision to proceed with this strategy. Based on the record evidence of Wickline’s strategic choices, counsel’s investigation and presentation of mitigating evidence did not fall below an objective standard of reasonableness. See Coleman I, 244 F.3d at 545-46 (<HOLDING>). But see Coleman II, 268 F.3d at 452 (finding Options: A. holding that the sixth amendment right to counsel embodies the right to effective assistance of counsel B. holding that counsel cannot be found ineffective for failing to pursue a particular mitigating factor where despite a reasonable investigation by counsel counsel was not put on notice of any such mitigating evidence C. holding that petitioner was not deprived of the right to effective assistance of counsel at sentencing where petitioner did not cooperate with counsel regarding the investigation and identification of mitigating evidence imposed restrictions upon counsel and refused to submit to further psychological or psychiatric testing D. holding that the statutory right to counsel at a civil commitment hearing implicitly includes the right to the effective assistance of that counsel E. recognizing that a criminal defendants right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that petitioner was not deprived of the right to effective assistance of counsel at sentencing where petitioner did not cooperate with counsel regarding the investigation and identification of mitigating evidence imposed restrictions upon counsel and refused to submit to further psychological or psychiatric testing
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 Party’s failure to enforce, at any time or for any period of time, any provision of this Agreement, or to exercise any right or remedy hereunder, shall not constitute a waiver of such provision, right or remedy or prevent such Party from enforcing any or all provisions of this Agreement and exercising any of its rights or remedies hereunder. To be effective any waiver must be in writing. The respective rights and remedies of the Parties provided herein are cumulative and do not exclude any other right or remedy of the Parties provided by law or otherwise available except as expressly set forth herein.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: You agree not to make or authorize the making of any disparaging remarks, comments, or statements about the Company, including its present or former agents, employees, officers, or directors. The Company agrees not to make any disparaging remarks, comments, or statements about you and, as appropriate, will advise selected personnel to avoid disparaging comments about you. Before the Termination Date, nothing in this Agreement precludes you from discussing terms and conditions of employment or exercising rights protected under federal labor law.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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: questions of state law, the Court may decline to exercise jurisdiction over state law claims upon dismissal of the claims over which the Court had original jurisdiction. “Under §§ 1367(c) and 1441(c), a court is not required to remand state law claims when the only federal claim has been dismissed. Instead, the district court maintains discretion to either remand the state law claims or keep them in federal court.” Lindsey v. Dillard’s, Inc., 306 F.3d 596, 599 (8th Cir.2002). Having granted Krambeck’s motion to dismiss her federal claims, the Court now considers the balance of factors informing the exercise of its discretion to remand. The district court’s discretion is substantial and is reviewed deferentially. See Deniz v. Municipality of Guaynabo, 285 F.3d 142, 150 (1st Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>) (citing Serapion v. Martinez, 119 F.3d 982, Options: A. holding that when original jurisdiction claims are dismissed before trial the district court must decline to exercise jurisdiction over pendent state claims unless there is an affirmative justification for doing so B. holding that federal district court retains substantial discretion when deciding whether to retain jurisdiction over pendent state claims after the linchpin federal claims are dismissed C. holding that if the federal claims are dismissed before trial the state claims should be dismissed as well D. holding that when all federal claims have been dismissed the court should decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims E. holding that after all federal claims had been dismissed if the district court does decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction these state claims shall be remanded to state court rather than dismissed because this case was originally filed in state court and removed to federal court

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that federal district court retains substantial discretion when deciding whether to retain jurisdiction over pendent state claims after the linchpin federal claims are dismissed
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The issuance by an Issuing Bank of any amendment, supplement or other modification to any Letter of Credit (excluding any amendment that reduces the amount of such Letter of Credit) issued by it shall be subject to the same conditions applicable under this Agreement to the issuance of new Letters of Credit (including that the request therefor be made through the applicable Issuing Bank and the Administrative Agent), and no such amendment, supplement or other modification shall be issued unless either (i) the respective Letter of Credit affected thereby would have complied with such conditions had it originally been issued hereunder in such amended, supplemented or modified form or (ii) the Administrative Agent and the Revolving Lenders, if any, required by Section 13.6 shall have consented thereto. In connection with any such amendment, supplement or other modification, the Borrower shall pay the fees, if any, payable under the last sentence of Section 3.5(c) .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Warrant shall only be exercisable at such times and in such amounts as follows: (i) four hundred forty-four thousand (444,000) Warrant Shares will be immediately exercisable, and (ii) the remaining four hundred forty-four thousand (444,000) Warrant Shares will become exercisable ratably with the funding of the first one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) under the Fortress Credit Facility (e.g., one hundred and eleven thousand (111,000) Warrant Shares will become exercisable on the date on which the first $25.0 million has been funded under the Fortress Credit Facility); provided, however, that this Warrant may be exercised only on or after the date which is thirty (30) days after the first date on which the Company completes the Public Transaction. The amounts of Warrant Shares and closing prices shall be subject to adjustment as provided herein in Section 2.

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: issues: (1) Did the trial court err by allowing the jury to view the defendant’s tattoos during jury deliberations? (2) Did the trial court err in denying the defendant’s motion for new trial based on prosecutorial misconduct? DISPLAY OF TATTOOS The issue of identification was central to this case. Prior to trial the defendant was ■placed in a photo line-up. Upon motion by defendant’s counsel, the court found this line-up to be unduly suggestive. However, following a Desserault hearing, Officer Lorenzano was allowed to make an in-court identification. Also, prior to trial, the state moved for an order requiring the defendant to pose for photographs to be used as exhibits. The trial court found this request proper, see State v. Rosthenhausler, 147 Ariz. 486, 711 P.2d 625 (1985) (<HOLDING>) and gave the defendant the option of either Options: A. holding that it was improper for the trial court to instruct the jury that it could not consider the states failure to videotape the defendant B. holding that to grant a new trial the error must be more than harmless C. holding it was not error for trial court to grant states request that defendant roll up his sleeve to reveal a tattoo D. holding that it was not plain error for the court not to give a self defense jury instruction where the defendant did not request one E. holding that although akinss letters reveal that he was worried about his counsels preparation for trial the record does not show that his counsel was unprepared for trial

assistant: The best answer is C. holding it was not error for trial court to grant states request that defendant roll up his sleeve to reveal a tattoo
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Each party shall be entitled to disclose Confidential Information of the other party where compelled by law to so disclose pursuant to any legal, judicial or administrative proceeding, provided the disclosing party provides all reasonable prior notice to the other party to allow it to seek a protective order or other appropriate relief. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in paragraphs 3 and 4 hereof, the Confidential Information may be disclosed to the extent that such disclosure is necessary to comply with any law, regulation, or order of court, provided that each party shall give the other party reasonable advance notice of any such proposed disclosure, shall use its reasonable best efforts to secure an agreement in writing to be bound by the provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4 of this Agreement from any person obtaining access to the Confidential Information pursuant to this paragraph 7, and shall advise the other party in writing of the manner of such disclosure.

assistant: No
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: Executive will be required to pay an arbitration fee to initiate the arbitration equal to what he/she would be charged as a first appearance fee in court. The Company shall advance the remaining fees and costs of the arbitrator. However, to the extent permissible under the law, and following the arbitrator’s ruling on the matter, the arbitrator may rule that the arbitrator’s fees and costs be distributed in an alternative manner. The arbitrator’s award in any arbitration brought pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement shall provide for the prevailing party to recover from the other party the prevailing party’s reasonable attorneys’ fees relating to such action.

assistant: 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: fact he heard the evidence and was more familiar than we with the evidentiary atmosphere at trial gives him, we think, a better informed view than we have. This is particularly true when the elements of damage are intangibles and the appraisal depends somewhat on an observation of the beneficiaries and evaluation of their testimony. The statutory beneficiaries in Daniel claimed damages for mental shock, wounded feelings, grief, sorrow, loss of companionship, and deprivation of the use and comfort of the deced ed for a directed verdict may move to have the verdict and any judgment entered thereon set aside and to have judgment entered in accordance with his motion for a directed verdict.... ") (emphasis added); Benton & Rhodes, Inc. v. Boden, 310 S.C. 400, 426 S.E.2d 823 (Ct.App.1993) (<HOLDING>); Marsh v. South Carolina Dep’t of Highways & Options: A. holding defendants failure to file motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict did not prevent district court from granting motion for directed verdict for which court reserved decision B. holding that a motion for directed verdict should be granted if there is no evidence on which a jury could legally base a verdict for damages against the moving party C. holding a directed verdict motion stating specific grounds is a prerequisite for a subsequent motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict D. holding that the trial court erred in granting the school boards posttrial motion for directed verdict because although the school board timely moved for a directed verdict during trial it did not serve its motion for directed verdict until the eleventh day after the verdict E. holding that a posttrial motion is not required after a grant of a directed verdict

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a directed verdict motion stating specific grounds is a prerequisite for a subsequent motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict
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 Modification Agreement shall become effective upon execution thereof by the parties hereto and may be executed in any number of counterparts, and each such counterpart, when so executed and delivered, shall be deemed to be an original and binding upon the party signing such counterpart; all such counterparts taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

assistant: Counterparts
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 Amendment contains the final and complete integration of all prior expressions by the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and shall constitute the entire agreement among the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof superseding all prior oral or written understandings or agreements.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be entertained because there is an intervening Court action affirming the Board decision in which CUE is asserted. 3 . There is a difference, however, between abandonment of an issue on appeal, whether express or implied, and "the situation in which an appellant states that he is appealing the Board’s decision on an issue, but then makes no arguments, or insufficient arguments, challenging the Board's determination.” Cacciola, 27 Vet.App, at 57. As stated by the Court in Cacciola, "[i]n such instances, the Court generally affirms the Board’s decision as a result of the appellant’s failure to plead with particularity the allegation of error and satisfy his burden of persuasion on appeal to show Board error.” Id. at 57-58; see also Hilkert v. West, 12 Vet.App. 145, 151 (1999) (en banc) (<HOLDING>), aff'd per curiam, 232 F.3d 908 (Fed.Cir.2000) Options: A. holding that the defendant bears the burden of demonstrating that the action should be transferred B. holding the appellant carries the burden of demonstrating error in the family courts findings of fact C. holding that an appellant bears the burden of demonstrating error on appeal D. holding that the party asserting notice error has the burden of demonstrating prejudice E. holding that appellant bears burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an appellant bears the burden of demonstrating error on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Escrow Agreement, the Merger Agreement, and the documents, instruments and other agreements specifically referred to herein or delivered pursuant hereto (a) constitute the entire agreement among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and (b) supersede all prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: action by Congress,’ no explicit statutory prohibition against the relief sought, and no exclusive statutory alternative remedy.” Schweiker v. Chilicky, 487 U.S. 412, 421, 108 S.Ct. 2460, 101 L.Ed.2d 370 (1988) (quoting Davis, 442 U.S. at 245, 99 S.Ct. 2264). We must therefore review the immigration statutes to determine whether a Bivens class action is available in cases like the one at bar. Section 1252 indicates a legislative intent to limit review of immigration decisions in federal district courts. Prior to the enactment of IIRIRA, judicial review of immigration decisions, including final orders, could occur either in a federal circuit court of appeals or in a federal district court. See Cheng Fan Kwok v. INS, 392 U.S. 206, 210, 215-16, 88 S.Ct. 1970, 20 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1968) (<HOLDING>); Castaneda v. INS, 23 F.3d 1576, 1579-80 (10th Options: A. holding that language found in 8 usc 1105aa 1961 giving circuit courts of appeal exclusive jurisdiction to review final orders was expressly limited to orders made in the course of deportation proceedings or to direct challenges of the deportation order itself and stating that in all other cases an aliens remedies would lie first in an action brought in an appropriate district court B. holding that withdrawal of judicial review over final orders of deportation also withdraws jurisdiction from motions to reconsider or reopen C. holding that because the nga vests exclusive jurisdiction to review all decisions of the commission in the circuit court of appeals there is no area of review whether relating to final or preliminary orders available in the district court internal citations omitted D. holding that the procedural aspects of iirira 309c apply only to ongoing exclusion or deportation proceedings and are irrelevant in cases involving aliens whose orders of deportation or exclusion were final on the effective date E. holding that under permanent rules of hrira the court of appeals lacks jurisdiction over claims of aliens ordered deported for crimes listed in ina and holding that district courts retain habeas jurisdiction over deportation orders of criminal aliens

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that language found in 8 usc 1105aa 1961 giving circuit courts of appeal exclusive jurisdiction to review final orders was expressly limited to orders made in the course of deportation proceedings or to direct challenges of the deportation order itself and stating that in all other cases an aliens remedies would lie first in an action brought in an appropriate district court
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement will be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, disregarding any state’s choice-of-law principles requiring the application of a jurisdiction’s laws other than the State of Delaware.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and seizure issue in the habeas court did not itself constitute an impermissible second prosecution: the ha-beas proceeding is not initiated by the State, and can in no way be likened to a second attempt to convict the petitioner for a single offense. Finally, relitigation of the search and seizure issue could not subject Pinkney to any additional jeopardy. Had the habeas court affirmed the Appellate Division’s decision that search of Pink-ney’s car was unconstitutional, Pinkney would have been left in no worse a position than if the issue had not been relitigated. However, because he lost on that issue, he will remain in custody under the jury’s original verdict of conviction, a permissible result under the Double Jeopardy Clause. Cf. Wilson, 420 U.S. at 344-45, 95 S.Ct. at 1022-23 (<HOLDING>). We therefore conclude that no double jeopardy Options: A. holding where a defendant successfully challenges a conviction on appeal jeopardy does not terminate B. holding that where a conviction is reversed after trial the double jeopardy clause does not bar a government appeal that if successful would only reinstate the conviction and would not subject defendant to a second trial C. holding that where juror did not disclose that she had an interest in the conviction of the defendant probable prejudice is shown and the conviction must be reversed D. holding that the government may appeal a postverdict ruling without violating double jeopardy where the appeal does not result in a new trial E. holding double jeopardy does not bar second trial after granting of new trial for reason other than insufficiency of evidence

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that where a conviction is reversed after trial the double jeopardy clause does not bar a government appeal that if successful would only reinstate the conviction and would not subject defendant to a second trial
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: US Lighting does not own, directly or indirectly, any equity or other ownership interest in any corporation, limited liability company, limited or general partnership, joint venture or other entity or enterprise. There are no Contracts or other obligations (contingent or otherwise) of US Lighting to retire, repurchase, redeem or otherwise acquire any outstanding shares of capital stock of, or other ownership interests in, any other Person or to provide funds to or make any investment (in the form of a loan, capital contribution or otherwise) in any other Person.

assistant: Subsidiaries
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 complainant and the Petroleum Club inspired the complainant to bring forth new details of the sexual assault. The complainant also allegedly filed a lawsuit against the Petroleum Club and appellant. This information was brought before the jury. The complainant testified that she had talked to attorneys regarding a civil suit against the Petroleum Club and appellant. She also stated her attorney had made a settlement demand to the Petroleum Club. Thus, the jury, knowing of the complainant’s potential lawsuit against the Petroleum Club and appellant, could draw their own conclusion as to its effect, if any, on her credibility in this case. The jury disregarded appellant’s defense as was its right. Moore v. State, 804 S.W.2d 165, 166 (TexApp.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). The jury is the sole judge of the credibility Options: A. holding that a district court was entitled to accept or reject testimony on the basis of the witnesses demeanor and candor or lack thereof and contradictions in the witnesses testimony B. holding jury is entitled to accept the states version of the facts and reject appellants version or reject any of the witnesses testimony C. holding that the jury is the tribunal to determine the weight to be accorded the testimony of the witnesses and accept or reject the valuations placed thereupon D. recognizing that a judge sitting as a factfinder may reject a witnesss uncontradicted testimony E. holding that the alj is free to reject the opinion of any physician when the evidence supports a contrary conclusion

assistant: The best answer is B. holding jury is entitled to accept the states version of the facts and reject appellants version or reject any of the witnesses testimony
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 decision of the arbitrator with respect to the claim will be final and binding upon the Company and the Claimant. BY PARTICIPATING IN THE PLAN, AND ACCEPTING THE GRANT, YOU, ON BEHALF OF YOURSELF AND ANY PERSON WITH A CLAIM RELATING TO YOUR GRANT, AGREE TO WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO SUE IN COURT OR TO PURSUE ANY OTHER LEGAL RIGHT OR REMEDY THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE BE AVAILABLE IN CONNECTION WITH THE RESOLUTION OF THE CLAIM.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Oysters in the Province of New-Jersey,” (passed March 27, 1719), Samuel Nevill, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey 86 (1752) (providing for forfeiture of any canoe, flat, scow, boat, or other vessel used by non-residents of New Jersey for raking oysters before “two of His Majesty’s Justices of Peace ... of the County where such Seizure shall be made” who “shall give Judgment against, and Condemn the same”); “An Act to Regulate the Fishery within that part of the Eastern Division of this Colony, from the Mouth of the Raritan River northward,” (passed May 10, 1768), Samuel Allinson, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey 309 (1776) (providing forty shilling fine to be recovered in action before justice of peace for fishing with nets in s 1874) (<HOLDING>); McGear v. Woodruff, 33 N.J.L. 213, 216 Options: A. holding that penalty action instituted pursuant to fish and game procedure act of 1897 did not include jury trial because it has been repeatedly held in this state that in a summary procedure for the collection of a penalty for violation of a police regulation neither party is entitled to a trial by jury B. holding that jury trial not required before imposition of penalty for selling intoxicating liquors contrary to city ordinance reasoning that prior to 1776 the legality of convictions before magistrates for petty offenses and for violations of police regulations without trial by jury was unquestioned C. holding that prior to 1776 convictions before mag istrates for petty criminal offenses and violations of police regulations were of frequent occurrence and were recognized as part of laws of england D. holding that defendants sixth amendment right to trial by a jury was not violated by district courts reliance on his prior convictions for purposes of sentencing as career offender E. holding that convictions before magistrates for small criminal offenses were unknown at common law and therefore defendant had no right to jury trial

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that jury trial not required before imposition of penalty for selling intoxicating liquors contrary to city ordinance reasoning that prior to 1776 the legality of convictions before magistrates for petty offenses and for violations of police regulations without trial by jury was unquestioned