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: Lucas must show he “convey[ed] to the employer his or her concern that the employer has engaged in a practice made unlawful by [Titl facie retaliation claim. C. Tortious Interference Claim. The OADC’s director submitted an affidavit, undisputed by any other evidence, testifying that her decision not to offer Lucas an OADC contract was based primarily on Lucas’s failure to list any references from the Defender’s Office in his application, and that she was never contacted by Thompson or Wilson about Lucas, his qualifications or his application. Based on this undisputed evidence, the magistrate judge ruled that Lucas failed to present any evidence that Thompson and White interfered with his ability to obtain an OADC contract. See Amoco Oil Co. v. Ervin, 908 P.2d 493, 500 (Colo. 1995) (<HOLDING>). Lucas asserts the magistrate judge failed to Options: A. recognizing the tort of interference with prospective contractual relations as a subspecies of the broader tort of interference with prospective economic advantage B. holding that tortious or deliberate intent to harm a plaintiffs business relationship is not alone sufficient to support an intentional interference claim there must also be proof that the defendants interference was accomplished through improper means C. holding that under colorado law tjortious interference with a prospective business relation requires a showing of intentional and improper interference preventing formation of a contract D. holding improper conduct to be an element of the tort of intentional interference with an advantageous business relationship E. holding that the difference between interference with contract and prospective relations is that second tort requires showing of malice

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that under colorado law tjortious interference with a prospective business relation requires a showing of intentional and improper interference preventing formation of a contract
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company and each of its Subsidiaries maintains insurance policies with reputable insurers that cover such risks and contain such policy limits, types of coverage as are adequate to insure against risks to which the Company, its Subsidiaries and their respective employees, business, properties and other assets would reasonably be expected to be exposed to in the operation of the business as currently conducted. All of these policies are valid and enforceable policies, all premiums due and payable under all these policies have been paid and the Company and its Subsidiaries are otherwise in compliance in all material respects with the terms of the policies. None of these policies is void or voidable and neither the Company nor any of its Subsidiaries has done anything or omitted to do anything that would make any policy void or voidable. The Company and each of its Subsidiaries has no Knowledge of any threatened termination of, or material premium increase with respect to, any of these policies. No material claim is outstanding under any of these policies and no event has occurred and, to the Company’s Knowledge, no circumstance exists that gives rise or is likely to give rise to a material claim under any policy. The Company has made available to the Investors a copy of each insurance policy maintained by the Company and its Subsidiaries as of the date of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 516 U.S. 365116 S.Ct. 872134 L.Ed.2d 4 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,v.State of MAINE et al. (Massachusetts Boundary Case) No. 35, Original. Supreme Court of the United States Feb. 26, 1996. 1 on exception to the report of the special master 2 The joint motion for entry of a supplemental decree is granted. SUPPLEMENTAL DECREE 3 The Court having, by its decision of February 25, 1986, adopted the recommendation of its Special Master that Vineyard Sound constitutes historic inland waters and overruled the exception of Massachusetts to the Report of its Special Master herein insofar as it challenged the Master's determination that the whole of Nantucket Sound does not constitute historic or ancient inland waters, and having, to this extent, adopted the Master's recommendations and confirmed his Report: 4 IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: 5 1. For the purposes of the Court's Decree herein dated October 6, 1975, 423 U.S. 1, 96 S.Ct. 23, 46 L.Ed.2d 1 (affirming the title of the United States to the seabed more than three geographic miles seaward of the coastline, and of the States to the seabed within the three geographic mile zone), the coastline of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts shall be determined on the basis that the whole of Vineyard Sound constitutes state inland waters and Nantucket Sound (with the exception of interior indentations which are described in paragraphs 2(c), (d) and (e) below) is made up of territorial seas and high seas. 6 2. For purposes of said Decree of October 6, 1975, the coastline of Massachusetts includes the following straight lines: 7 (a) A line from a point on Gay Head on Martha's Vineyard (approximately 41x21'10"N, 70x50'07"W) to the southwestern point of Cuttyhunk Island (approximately 41x24'39"N, 70x56'34"W); 8 (b) A line from a point on East Chop (approximately 41x28'15"N, 70x34'05"W) to a point on Cape Cod (approximately 41x33'10"N, 70x29'30"W); 9 (c) A line from a point southeast of East Chop (approximately 41x27' 30"N, 70x33'18"W) to a point west of Cape Pogue (approximately 41x25'06"N, 70x27'56"W) on the island of Martha's Vineyard; 10 (d) A line from a point on Point Gammon on Cape Cod (approximately 41x36'36"N, 70x15'40"W) to the southwestern-most point of Monomoy Island (approximately 41x33'02"N, 70x00'59"W); and 11 (e) A line from a point on the west coast of Great Island (approximately 41x37'08"N, 70x16'15"W) to a point on Hyannis Point on Cape Cod (approximately 41x37'27"N, 70x17'34"W). 12 3. The Court retains jurisdiction to entertain such further proceedings, enter such orders, and issue such writs as from time to time may be deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate and supplement the decree and the rights of the respective parties. 13 Justice SOUTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and supplemental decree.

assistant: 10
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: As of the Closing Date, Schedule 5.9 hereto, as such Schedule may be updated from time to time in accordance with the terms hereof, provides a complete and correct list of: (a) all registered copyrights owned by each Loan Party; (b) all patents owned by each Loan Party and all applications for Patents owned by such Loan Party; (c) all registered trademarks owned by each Loan Party, all applications for registration of trademarks owned by such Loan Party; and (d) all Intellectual Property licenses entered into by each Loan Party pursuant to which (i) such Loan Party has provided any license in Intellectual Property owned or controlled by such Loan Party to any other Person (other than non-exclusive software licenses granted in the ordinary course of business) with a value in excess of $1,000,000 or (ii) any Person has granted to such Loan Party any license in Intellectual Property owned or controlled by such Person that is material to the business of such Loan Party, including any Intellectual Property that is incorporated in any Inventory, software, or other product marketed, sold, licensed, or distributed by such Loan Party (other than non-exclusive software licenses granted in the ordinary course of business). Other than as set forth on Schedule 5.9 hereto, no Loan Party owns any copyrights, patents or trademarks, the failure to register which could be materially adverse to the conduct of the business of the Loan Parties taken as a whole. Each Loan Party owns exclusively or holds licenses in all Intellectual Property that is necessary in or material to the conduct of its business, and all employees and contractors of each Loan Party who were involved in the creation or development of any Intellectual Property for such Loan Party that is necessary in or material to the business of such Loan Party have signed agreements containing assignment of such employer’s or contractor’s rights in any Intellectual Property to such Loan Party and obligations of confidentiality. To each Loan Party’s knowledge, (a) such Loan Party is not currently infringing or misappropriating any Intellectual Property rights of any Person, and (b) no product manufactured, used, distributed, licensed, or sold by or service provided by such Loan Party is currently infringing or misappropriating any Intellectual Property rights of any Person, in each case, except where such infringement either individually or in the aggregate could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision hereof is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be prohibited or unenforceable, it shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective only to the extent of such prohibition or unenforceability, and such prohibition or unenforceability shall not invalidate the balance of such provision to the extent it is not prohibited or unenforceable, nor invalidate the other provisions hereof.

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 execution, delivery and performance of the Transaction Documents by the Company and the consummation by the Company of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby, including, without limitation, the issuance of the Purchase Notice Shares, do not and will not: (a) result in a violation of the Company’s or any Subsidiary’s certificate or articles of incorporation, by-laws or other organizational or charter documents, (b) conflict with, or constitute a material default (or an event that with notice or lapse of time or both would become a material default) under, result in the creation of any Lien upon any of the properties or assets of the Company or any Subsidiary, or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation of, any agreement, indenture, instrument or any “lock-up” or similar provision of any underwriting or similar agreement to which the Company or any Subsidiary is a party, or (c) result in a violation of any federal, state or local law, rule, regulation, order, judgment or decree (including federal and state securities laws and regulations) applicable to the Company or any Subsidiary or by which any property or asset of the Company or any Subsidiary is bound or affected (except for such conflicts, defaults, terminations, amendments, accelerations, cancellations and violations as would not, individually or in the aggregate, have a Material Adverse Effect) nor is the Company otherwise in violation of, conflict with or in default under any of the foregoing. The business of the Company is not being conducted in violation of any law, ordinance or regulation of any governmental entity, except for possible violations that either singly or in the aggregate do not and will not have a Material Adverse Effect. The Company is not required under federal, state or local law, rule or regulation to obtain any consent, authorization or order of, or make any filing or registration with, any court or governmental agency in order for it to execute, deliver or perform any of its obligations under the Transaction Documents (other than any SEC, FINRA or state securities filings that may be required to be made by the Company subsequent to any Closing or any registration statement that may be filed pursuant hereto); provided that, for purposes of the representation made in this sentence, the Company is assuming and relying upon the accuracy of the relevant representations and agreements of Investor herein.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices and other communications to be given or to otherwise be made to any party to this Agreement shall be deemed to be sufficient if contained in a written instrument delivered in person or duly sent by certified mail or by a recognized national courier service, postage or charges prepaid, (a) to Scientific Games Corporation, Attn: Chief Legal Officer, at 6650 S. El Camino Road, Las Vegas, NV 89118, (b) to Executive, at the last address shown in the Company’s records, or (c) to such other replacement address as may be designated in writing by the addressee to the addressor.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of conduct or statements by persons involved in the decision-making process, which indicate a discriminatory attitude was more likely than not a motivating factor in the employer’s decision.” Kratzer, 398 F.3d at 1045-46. Manning argues ARIC’s August 29 letter is direct evidence that ARIC terminated Manning’s employment because of her application for STD benefits. Manning argues that ARIC presented her a “Hobson’s choice”: Manning could either present objective medical evidence supporting her STD benefits claim or obtain a medical certification from her doctor relinquishing her STD benefits claim. Manning argues that other circuits have considered such a Hobson’s choice as direct evidence supporting a Section 510 claim. See Lindemann v. Mobil Oil Corp., 141 F.3d 290, 298 (7th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>) was direct evidence supporting a Section 510 Options: A. holding that an assistant professor hired for a fixed term of one academic year had no property interest in his job because the terms of his employment allowed that his contract not be renewed B. holding that a company policy which forced an employee to choose between losing his job for the exercise of his rights under erisaprotected benefits or keeping his job and forcing him to give up his benefits would be essentially unfair or a quintessential hobsons choice C. holding injured employee who asked his employer for medical assistance and employer refused and employee then went to physician of his own choice employee could recover medical benefits D. holding that municipality could not be liable on failuretosupervise theory where police officer had history of insubordination at prior policing job due to absence of any evidence showing that the officer was incompetently performing his job on such a consistent basis that keeping him on duty represented a deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of its citizens E. holding that removal of job responsibility did not constitute an adverse employment action because there was no change in the plaintiffs job position grade pay or benefits

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a company policy which forced an employee to choose between losing his job for the exercise of his rights under erisaprotected benefits or keeping his job and forcing him to give up his benefits would be essentially unfair or a quintessential hobsons choice
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: FCX will, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect (a) its legal existence, except in the case of any Subsidiary other than PTFI, to the extent the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, and (b) the rights, licenses, permits, privileges, franchises, patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade names material to the conduct of its business, except to the extent the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; provided that the foregoing shall not prohibit any merger, consolidation, liquidation or dissolution permitted under Section 6.03.

assistant: Existence
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 upon the Court being informed that a reputable sexual offender treatment therapist recommends contact to recommence. Earl II complains about this aspect of the court’s order, claiming that it violates his Fifth Amendment right .against self-incrimination. He asserts that any sexual offender treatment program will require an admission of,sexual abuse. Earl II contends that in order to obtain the recommendation needed to see his children, he will have to incriminate himself. .. The Fifth Amendment provides that no person “shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” U.S. Const, amend. V. This privilege applies not just to criminal trials, but also allows a person “ ‘not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil Minn.1987) (<HOLDING>); State v. Fuller, 276 Mont. 155, 915 P.2d 809, Options: A. holding court could not require parents to divulge incriminating information but court could consider parents failure to undergo meaningful therapy in deciding whether parents could regain their children B. recognizing fundamental right of parents to care for their children C. recognizing that because parents have a constitutional right to direct their childrens education organization has standing to bring claim on behalf of parents D. holding that courts may require one or both parents to pay for a courtappointed attorney for their children E. holding right to family integrity is nebulous in nature and not sufficiently particularized for government officials to know that their conduct in removing children from parents custody without court order violated parents substantive rights

assistant: The best answer is A. holding court could not require parents to divulge incriminating information but court could consider parents failure to undergo meaningful therapy in deciding whether parents could regain their children
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: injuries to both elbows in an accident in which defendants played no part, he was directed to put on a jumpsuit and wear a "black box” mechanical restraint device on his wrists, and was not provided with assistance to feed or bathe himself — all of which caused him pain and discomfort, but no residual injuries. 5 . Bivens was not charged with a crime, thus, suppression of the evidence at a criminal trial was not available as a deterrent against such police conduct. 6 . Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, only the United States could be sued, not the individual federal agents. 7 . The Supreme Court has also declined to imply a Bivens cause of action in new circumstances not directly related to the existence of alternative state remedies. See Maleslco, 534 U.S. at 74, 122 S.Ct. 515 (<HOLDING>); Wilkie, 551 U.S. at 562, 127 S.Ct. 2588 Options: A. holding that connecticut courts look to the identity or instrumentality test to determine whether one corporate entity can properly be held responsible for the obligations of another corporate entity B. holding that fmla does not impose individual liability C. holding mere status as a director does not create liability where the actions complained of were taken by individual managerial employees of a corporate entity D. holding that a corporate entity must be represented by licensed counsel E. holding that bivens liability does not extend to a corporate entity because the deterrence rationale applies only to individual actors

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that bivens liability does not extend to a corporate entity because the deterrence rationale applies only to individual actors
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall become effective on the date (the “Effective Date”) on which (i) the Borrower, each Lender and each Agent shall have signed a counterpart hereof (whether the same or different counterparts) and shall have delivered (including by way of facsimile or by electronic mail in Adobe Corporation’s Portable Document Format (or PDF)) the same to the Administrative Agent at the Notice Office or, in the case of the Lenders, shall have given the Administrative Agent telephonic (confirmed in writing), written or telex notice (actually received) at such office that same has been signed and mailed to it and (ii) the conditions contained in Section 4 are satisfied in accordance with the terms of Section 4. Unless the Administrative Agent has received actual notice from the Required Lenders that the conditions contained in Section 4 have not been met, upon the satisfaction of the condition described in clause (i) of the immediately preceding sentence and upon the Administrative Agent’s good faith determination that the conditions described in clause (ii) of the immediately preceding sentence have been met, then the Effective Date shall have been deemed to have occurred, regardless of any subsequent determination that one or more of the conditions thereto had not been met. The Administrative Agent will give the Borrower and each Lender prompt written notice of the occurrence of the Effective Date.

assistant: Effectiveness
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: Notices or other communications required to be given by any Party pursuant to this Agreement shall be written in English and Chinese and delivered personally or sent by registered mail or prepaid mail or by a recognized courier service or by facsimile transmission to the relevant address of each Party as set forth below or other addresses of the Party as specified by such Party from time to time. The date when the notice is deemed to be duly served shall be determined as follows; (a) a notice delivered personally is deemed duly served upon the delivery; (b) a notice sent by mail is deemed duly served the tenth (10th) day after the date of the air registered mail with the postage prepaid has been sent out (as is shown on the postmark), or the fourth (4th) day after the delivery by an internationally recognized courier service: and (c) a notice sent by facsimile transmission is deemed duly served upon the receipt time as shown on the transmission confirmation.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: could not state that proposition. Alabama law is not permitted by the FAA to treat arbitratio his case. That fact is uncontested. In addition, it is uncontested that the contract to which Stiles assented may be changed by AGFC. A contract incorporating such a clause is valid under the laws of both Utah and Alabama. See discussion below. Stiles has, therefore, assented to an arbitration clause, even absent his signature. Cf. Clayton v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins. Society, 981 F.Supp. 1447 (M.D.Ala.1997) (compelling arbitration where arbitration clause was included in constitution of fraternal benefit society, which was incorporated by reference into insurance contract); Hill v. Gateway 2000, Inc., 105 F.3d 1147 (7th Cir.), cert. den., — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 47, 139 L.Ed.2d 13 (1997) (<HOLDING>). The provision is not invalid because not Options: A. holding corporation vicariously liable for assault on customer by assistant manager as customer was engaged in trying to settle a controversy concerning a portion of defendants business B. holding former employee could properly use recollection of customer information where he did not otherwise misappropriate an actual customer list C. holding that arbitration clause which was included with product mailed to customer and with proviso that customer could return product within 30 days was binding on customer who did not return computer D. holding that a bank customer was not bound to arbitrate where the signature card that was signed referenced a collateral document which contained an arbitration clause but the bank never sent the customer a copy of the collateral document E. holding that murder committed by customer was not foreseeable result of excessive sale of alcohol to customer

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that arbitration clause which was included with product mailed to customer and with proviso that customer could return product within 30 days was binding on customer who did not return computer
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: venue provision as permissive. See, e.g., Smiga v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 766 F.2d 698 (2d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1067, 106 S.Ct. 1381, 89 L.Ed.2d 607 (1986) (permissive); In Re VMS Securities Litigation, 21 F.3d 139 (7th Cir.1994) (permissive); but see Sunshine Beauty Supplies, Inc. v. United States District Court for the Central District of California, 872 F.2d 310, 312 (9th Cir.1989) (mandatory). Additionally, two district courts within this circuit, excluding the court in the decision below, have had occasion to interpret section nine; both have held that it confers permissive, rather than mandatory, venue on district courts with the requisite subject matter and personal jurisdiction. U.S. for Kirchdorfer v. Aegis/Zublin Joint Venture, 869 F.Supp. 387 (E.D.Va.1994) (<HOLDING>); Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Options: A. holding that counterpart section of missouri uniform act confers jurisdiction on circuit courts of that state to enter judgment on an award and concluding that circuit court had no jurisdiction to act where the parties agreement provided for arbitration in new york and not missouri B. holding that arbitration award is binding on the parties C. holding that section nine does not limit confirmation of an award to the district court in the district of arbitration and confirmed a new york arbitration over whose parties the court had personal jurisdiction D. recognizing forum selection clause providing that no such claim shall be commenced prosecuted or continued in any forum other than the courts of the state of new york located in the city and county of new york or in the united states district court for the southern district of new york as clear and unambiguous expression of parties selection of exclusive forum in affirming district courts dismissal of action commenced in united states district court for the district of new jersey E. recognizing that an action at common law can be maintained on an arbitration award rendered under the parties submission that does not comply with the arbitration statute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that section nine does not limit confirmation of an award to the district court in the district of arbitration and confirmed a new york arbitration over whose parties the court had personal jurisdiction
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: Company shall indemnify Executive to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law with regard to Executive’s actions (or inactions) on behalf of the Company; provided , Executive acted in good faith and in a manner Executive reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the Company, and, with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, Executive had no reasonable cause to believe Executive’s conduct was unlawful. The Company shall also provide Executive with advancement of legal fees and other expenses on a current basis to the fullest extent permitted by law, subject to Executive entering into an agreement with the Company to repay all amounts which may have been advanced to Executive if it is found in a final judgement that Executive was not entitled to indemnification. The Company will maintain directors’ and officers’ liability insurance in amounts and on terms reasonable and customary for similarly situated companies.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that separateness. In Grace’s view, for the Maxima to become Nathaniel’s separate property, he owed her half of the value of the automobile because the couple had purchased it with “joint” funds. Likewise, Nathaniel had to pay “his” separate part of the marital debt for health and automobile insurance. {¶ 58} However, spouses cannot by agreement convert marital assets and debt into separate assets and debt, unless the agreement is pursuant to an immediate separation. R.C. 3103.06 (“A husband and wife cannot, by any contract with each other, alter their legal relations, except that they may agree to an immediate separation and make provisions for the support of either of them and their children during the separation”); Blair v. Blair (Mar. 5, 2002), 3d Dist. No. 9-01-36, 2002 WL 359470 (<HOLDING>). “ ‘R.C. 3103.06 prohibits post-nuptial Options: A. holding that circuit court erred in failing to consider that marital property in the form of marital earnings was used to pay debt against nonmarital property B. holding that separate property valued at 45000 was transmuted to marital property when improved by 3800 of marital property C. holding that the trial court erred in finding that marital property was the former wifes separate property based on a nonseparation agreement in which the former husband purported to relinquish any interest in the marital property D. holding trial court had no authority to award portion of the marital property to wifes children from another marriage even though money they received by way of social security benefits were commingled with the marital estate and used in part for the aequisition of marital property E. holding that separate property may become marital property if spouse donates it to marital unit with intent at time of donation that property become marital

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the trial court erred in finding that marital property was the former wifes separate property based on a nonseparation agreement in which the former husband purported to relinquish any interest in the marital property
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: purpose of a right of first refusal is not to allow the holder to compel the property owner to sell the property at a designated price, as may be the case with the existence of an option.... Rather, the purpose is to allow the holder of the right to be notified when the owner intends to sell, or has accepted an offer, which, in most cases, will be presumptively the fair market value of the property, and to allow the holder to purchase the property under identical terms. Id. at 234-35. The Connecticut Supreme Court then looked to the language of the contract creating the right, and concluded that the right of first refusal would be triggered only if (1) the grantees “form the intention” of selling the property, and (2) the grantees accept a bona fide offer to purchase the property. (<HOLDING>); Draper v. Gochman, 400 S.W.2d 545 (Tex.1966) Options: A. holding given language in agreement right of first refusal could not be exercised in context of a foreclosure sale B. holding right of first refusal only applied to a voluntary sale and taking of property by condemnation is involuntary therefore right of first refusal not triggered C. holding that a failure to comply with the foreclosure statutes invalidates a foreclosure sale D. holding that plaintiffmortgagor lacked standing to enforce the terms of a foreclosure sale since there was no statutory authority allowing a mortgagor to enforce the provisions of a sale agreement when a foreclosure purchaser is in default E. holding united states marshals involuntary bankruptcy sale of property did not trigger right of first refusal

assistant: The best answer is A. holding given language in agreement right of first refusal could not be exercised in context of a foreclosure sale
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: his penis fused to his scrotum, covered in scabies, with developmental delays, a Vitamin D deficiency, no ability to crawl or walk, suffering from night terrors, afraid of the bath tub and water, demonstrating sexually explicit behaviors, and unable to speak. Although she may not have known that R.A. would get these particular injuries from the circumstances of placing R.A. with Akin, Jordan knew that these types of injuries or much worse were the probable result of the circumstances of leaving a baby in the custody of Akin. See id. The single act of placing R.A. with Akin under any of these circumstances permits termination under section D. See In re R.D., 955 S.W.2d at 367. Here, however, the evidence shows that Jordan not only placed R.A. in these cir .-San Antonio 1997, no writ)) (<HOLDING>). Viewing the evidence as a whole, we hold a Options: A. holding evidence legally insufficient B. holding evidence legally and factually sufficient under sections d and e to terminate mothers parental rights based in part on evidence that mother placed children with physically abusive father C. holding evidence legally sufficient D. holding evidence legally sufficient under sections d and e E. holding evidence legally and factually sufficient under sections d and e to terminate mothers parental rights based in part on evidence that mother placed children with father who lived transient lifestyle with children

assistant: The best answer is D. holding evidence legally sufficient under sections d and e
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: had run. In so holding, this Court noted that [t]he wife’s injury is the meritorious cause of action, and, in legal effect, it is the action of the wife. If the statute of limitations does not operate to bar her action, this suit is not barred, for the husband has, independently of her, no right of action whatever. In Tennessee the statutes of limitation apply to the cause of action, and are not directed to their mere form. Id. at 613 (quoting Fink v. Campbell, 70 F. 664, 667-68 (6th Cir.1895)). More recently, our Court of Appe 043 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1978) (adopting majority rule that appointment of guardian for mentally incompetent person does not terminate tolling and start running of limitations period); Whalen v. Certain-Teed Prods. Corp., 108 Ga.App. 686, 134 S.E.2d 528, 530 (1963) (<HOLDING>); Barton-Malow Co. v. Wilburn, 556 N.E.2d 324, Options: A. holding that the appointment of a guardian for a mentally incompetent or nonage person does not have the effect of commencing the running of the period of limitations tolled by virtue of the disability B. holding that appointment of guardian does not operate to start statute of limitations running in cases where title to cause of action is in person belonging to class of disabled persons encompassed within tolling provision C. holding that appointment of a conservator does not remove a mentally disabled persons legal disability so as to start the statute of limitations running D. holding that tolling statute applicable to those disabled by minority or mental illness continues to operate regardless of guardians appointment E. holding that appointment of guardian over incompetent adult does not remove legal disability so as to halt tolling and commence running of statute of limitations

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that appointment of guardian does not operate to start statute of limitations running in cases where title to cause of action is in person belonging to class of disabled persons encompassed within tolling provision
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower has filed or caused to be filed all tax returns which are required to be filed (or has obtained authorized extensions for such filings) and has paid all taxes shown to be due and payable on said returns or on any assessments made against it or any of its property and all other taxes, fees or other charges imposed on it or any of its property by any Governmental Authority (other than any the amount or validity of which are currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which reserves in conformity with GAAP have been provided on the books of the Borrower, as the case may be); no material tax Lien has been filed against the Borrower, and, to the knowledge of the Borrower, no claim is being asserted, with respect to any such tax, fee or other charges.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: discovery ordered by the trial court was overbroad, prohibitively expensive, and unduly burdensome. The trial court denied the motion. Because Arthur did not file a motion to compel further discovery from Harris following the November 21, 2008 hearing, Harris had no opportunity to urge his objections and motion for a protective order prior to being ordered to produce the documents sought by Arthur. We hold that in compelling discovery from Harris without requiring Arthur to identify specific discovery requests with which Harris had not complied and without having before it a motion to compel discovery from Harris, the trial court acted arbitrarily and without considering the discovery rules. See Tex.R. Civ. P. 215.1, 215.2, 215.3; In re Ford Motor Co., 165 S.W.3d 315, 317 (Tex.2005) (<HOLDING>). We further hold that the trial court abused Options: A. holding that when the agencys decision was based on an erroneous and completely unsupported assumption the decision was arbitrary and capricious B. holding that mandamus relief is available when trial court does not follow guiding rules and principles and reaches arbitrary and unxeasonable decision C. holding that trial court clearly abuses its discretion if it reaches decision so arbitrary and unreasonable as to amount to clear and prejudicial error of law D. holding that where the trial court reaches a correct disposition this court can affirm on any basis E. holding that evidence contrary to an administrators decision does not make the decision arbitrary and capricious so long as a reasonable basis appears for the decision

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that mandamus relief is available when trial court does not follow guiding rules and principles and reaches arbitrary and unxeasonable decision
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 Borrowers will use the proceeds of the Loans drawn on the Effective Date, together with cash on hand of the Company and its Subsidiaries, on the Effective Date to, directly or indirectly finance a portion of the Transactions.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Racketeering — here, money laundering. The government and defendants agree that Guideline offense level 23 for section 1956(a)(l)(A)(i) is not relevant or applicable given the evidence at trial. While this conclusion does not seem ordained by the relevant Guidelines provisions, there is no reason to force a more harsh sentence than the government seeks. The evidence at trial proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendants conspired to violate both section 1956(a)(l)(B)(i) and section 1957. A sentence that correctly reflects this determination is necessary. See U.S.S.G. § lB1.2(d) and cmts. 4 & 5 (where a jury verdict does not establish which offenses were the objects of a conspiracy, the court makes the determination); see also United States v. Malpeso, 115 F.3d 155, 168 (2d Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). Base offense level 20 is the highest Options: A. holding that 106a is constitutional B. holding constitutional ussg lb12d C. holding a party failed to preserve error on its constitutional due process argument concerning notice when they did not cite any state or federal constitutional provision to the trial court or otherwise explain how lack of notice violated their constitutional rights D. recognizing constitutional right to effective counsel E. recognizing the right to trial by jury is a constitutional right to be given the same protections as other constitutional rights

assistant: The best answer is B. holding constitutional ussg lb12d
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 execution and delivery of this Agreement, the other documents and agreements to be executed by the Holding Corporation as contemplated hereunder, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby, and the compliance with the terms and conditions hereof or thereof will not (i) materially contravene any provision of law to which the Holding Corporation is subject or any statute, decree, rule, regulation, injunction, judgment, order, decree, ruling, charge, or other restriction binding upon the Holding Corporation or contravene any order or permit applicable to the Holding Corporation, (ii) conflict with, result in a breach of, constitute a default under, result in the acceleration of any obligation under, create in any party the right to accelerate, terminate, modify or cancel, or require any notice under, any material agreement, contract, lease, license, instrument, or other arrangement to which the Holding Corporation is a party, or by which the Holding Corporation is bound, or to which the Holding Corporation’s assets are subject, or (iii) result in the attachment, creation or imposition of any Security Interest upon any of the Acquired Assets and/or Assumed Liabilities.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: population of those areas in which Plaintiffs reside. Moreover, the county plaintiffs also will be adversely affected by statistical sampling. Second, irrespective of the actual effect of sampling, Plaintiffs will suffer injuries as a consequence of Defendants’ failure to conduct a lawful census in a timely manner. This injury appears certain to occur and thus is premature only if a plaintiff must actually suffer a threatened injury prior to obtaining preventive relief. A plaintiff is not required to wait until a defendant engages in unlawful, unconstitutional conduct to have standing to seek judicial redress. See Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. at 991, 102 S.Ct. 2777; Pennell v. City of San Jose, 485 U.S. 1, 108 S.Ct. 849, 99 L.Ed.2d 1 (1988); Bennett v. Spear, at -, 117 S.Ct. at 1163-64 (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs injuries are “fairly traceable” to Options: A. holding that allegation of procedural injury does not affect the issues of injury in fact or causation B. holding that to have standing a plaintiff must establish an injury in fact a casual connection between the injury and that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision C. holding that because fact of injury was a distinct question from quantum of injury common proof could establish classwide injury even though amount of damage to each plaintiff was uncertain D. recognizing that the government not the relator must have suffered the injury in fact required for article iii standing E. holding general allegations of injury satisfy requirements of article iii and a plaintiff need not allege each specific subsidiary fact that supports its general claim of injury

assistant: The best answer is E. holding general allegations of injury satisfy requirements of article iii and a plaintiff need not allege each specific subsidiary fact that supports its general claim of injury