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: requirement that the defendant intend his or her speec 631, 634, 141 Ill. Dec. 444 (1990) (“luring or attempted luring of a child into an automobile for a criminal purpose is in no way protected by the first amendment”); People v. Ruppenthal, 331 Ill. App. 3d 916, 771 N.E.2d 1002, 1005-06, 265 Ill. Dec. 43 (2002) (rejecting First Amendment challenge because knowingly attempting to solicit a person believed to be a child has no constitutional protection); State v. Green, 397 S.C. 268, 724 S.E.2d 664, 668 (2012) (recognizing “speech used to further the sexual exploitation of children has been routinely denied constitutional protection as the State has a compelling interest in preventing the sexual abuse of children”); State v. Robins, 2002 WI 65, 253 Wis. 2d 298, 646 N.W.2d 287, 297 (<HOLDING>). ¶19 Finding that speech made with the intent Options: A. holding that the first amendment does not protect obscenity or pornography produced with actual children B. holding that the first amendment does not protect child enticements whether initiated over the internet or otherwise C. holding first amendment does not protect nonexpressive conduct D. holding that where the first amendment does not protect a certain activity there can be no first amendment right of association to engage in that activity E. holding that the first amendment does not protect true threats against the president

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the first amendment does not protect child enticements whether initiated over the internet or otherwise
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: beyond its proper bounds. Id. at 60-61, 118 S.Ct. 469. Limiting its holding to the facts of the case, the Court stated that: We need not consider whether the statute requires some other kind of connection between a bribe and the expenditure of federal funds, for in this case the bribe was related to the housing of a prisoner in facilities paid for in significant part by federal funds themselves. Id. at 59, 118 S.Ct. 469. Consequently, the Court left the door open regarding whether or not some nexus must exist between the alleged theft or bribe and the federal funds. As a result of the Supreme Court’s holding in Salinas, a circuit split has developed on the issue of whether some sort of nexus or connection must be shown. See, e.g., United States v. Dakota, 197 F.3d 821 (6th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Grossi, 143 F.3d 348 (7th Options: A. holding that 666 does not require any connection between the misconduct and federal funds B. holding that some federal connection to the misconduct is required C. holding that intervening misconduct can sever the temporal proximity connection between the protected conduct and the adverse employment D. holding that a college received federal funds where the funds were granted to its students as financial aid rather than directly to the college because the language of the section does not distinguish between direct and indirect receipt of federal funds E. holding that to show a causal connection the plaintiff must demonstrate a relationship between the misconduct and the plaintiffs injury

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 666 does not require any connection between the misconduct and federal funds
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: an insured should receive, but instead contest whether they owe the insured any damages at all. Plaintiff concedes that an insurer does not expose itself to attorney fees by contesting the liability of an uninsured or underinsured motorist, but contends that the insurer may be required to pay attorney fees if it raises an affirmative defense that, for some other reason, could result in a determination that the insurer owes no damages at all to the insured. Defendant disagrees that this court’s ruling in Grisby may be extended to UM/UIM proceedings. Defendant contends that the Court of Appeals erroneously has equated the phrase “the damages due the insured” in ORS 742.061(3)(a) with the phrase “the amount of benefits due the insured” in ORS 742.061(2)(a). See Cardenas, 230 Or App at 412 (<HOLDING>). PIP benefits, defendant asserts, are Options: A. holding that plaintiff could recover medical fees not actually paid by the insurance company pursuant to an insurance contract B. holding that further supervised release may be ordered as a sentence for violation of supervised release C. holding that if an insurance company is as a matter of state law liable to a plaintiff in the personal injury action subsequent discharge of the assured in bankruptcy does not alter the obligation of the insurance company and further finding that it is the policy of the law to discharge the bankrupt but not to release from liabilities those who are liable with him D. holding that defendant insurance company could not be held liable in negligence to a plaintiff for failure to disclose the insureds medical condition where defendant insurance company had not assumed a professional and expert position with respect to the insureds physical condition E. holding defendant insurance company ineligible for safe harbor in um case because defendant asserted that release agreement barred further recovery by plaintiff

assistant: The best answer is E. holding defendant insurance company ineligible for safe harbor in um case because defendant asserted that release agreement barred further recovery by plaintiff
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: reason for promoting Dixon, and Sabzevari has failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether this reason is a pretext for discrimination.”). 31 . Cavalier v. Clearlake Rehab. Hosp., Inc., 306 Fed.Appx. 104, 107 (5th Cir.2009) (unpublished) (citing Indest v. Freeman Decorating, Inc., 164 F.3d 258, 264 (5th Cir.1999)); see Faragher, 524 U. ere referred to as "the White girls” in a way that "called into question [the sisters’] racial identity.” However, no deposition testimony or other evidence in the record supports that allegation. Unsubstantiated assertions are insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. See QT Trading, L.P. v. M/V Saga Morus, 641 F.3d 105, 111 (5th Cir.2011). 33 . Cf. Septimus v. Univ. of Houston, 399 F.3d 601, 612 (5th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). 34 . Turner v. Baylor Richardson Med. Ctr., Options: A. recognizing a hostile work environment claim under section 1983 B. holding that a single offensive racist comment was not sufficient to establish a hostile work environment C. holding that the evidence was insufficient to support the plaintiffs sexbased hostile work environment claim because even though much of the complainedof conduct was boorish and offensive most of it was not personally experienced by the plaintiff D. holding that certain conduct was irrelevant to plaintiffs hostile work environment claim absent evidence that plaintiff was contemporaneously aware of it E. holding that the fact that the offensive material was not directed specifically at the plaintiff does not as a matter of law preclude a jury from finding that the conduct subjected her to a hostile work environment based on her sex

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the evidence was insufficient to support the plaintiffs sexbased hostile work environment claim because even though much of the complainedof conduct was boorish and offensive most of it was not personally experienced by the plaintiff
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to find that it was being utilized as a commercial establishment related to the distribution of powdered and crack cocaine. Consequently, like the defendant in Talley, Thornton did not have a legitimate or reasonable expectation of privacy in 2316 Eastview Avenue. Moreover, in the absence of evidence that Thornton was inside the house at 2316 Eastview Avenue with the permission of the person having authority over it, this Court must conclude that he was a trespasser. The Sixth Circuit has held that trespassers do not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place on which they are trespassing. United States v. Hunyady, 409 F.3d 297 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1067, 126 S.Ct. 810, 163 L.Ed.2d 637 (2005). See also, United States v. McRae, 156 F.3d 708; 711 (6th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). However, even if the evidence had established Options: A. holding that rooming house residents had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the front hallway of the house they shared which was not obviously a rooming house open to the general public B. holding that the defendant failed to demonstrate legitimate expectation of privacy where he could not show that he had the owners permission to use the car or demonstrate prior use or control of the car C. holding that defendant staying in abandoned house had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the house despite having a key to the house and the ability to let people in and out of it D. holding that a defendant who had been living in a vacant house for approximately one week failed to demonstrate that he had a legitimate ex pectation of privacy E. holding that a defendant who had borrowed a car for a limited period of time had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the cars locked trunk where it was the very person from whom he had borrowed the car who first called the police after he failed to return the car

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a defendant who had been living in a vacant house for approximately one week failed to demonstrate that he had a legitimate ex pectation of privacy
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: there was no explicit delineation of which subjects were permitted. Therefore, the Policy did not regulate viewpoints on a list of permitted subjects; it simply eliminated one subject, religion, from the subjects that could be discussed in this nonpublic forum. Therefore, the Building Authority claims that it properly exerted its right to exercise its control over the nonpublic forum lobby in a reasonable and viewpoint-neutral manner: Its Policy prohibits all religious displays and symbols. It further suggests that there is no evidence that it would allow, under private sponsorship, secular seasonal holiday displays. We cannot accept these attempts to distinguish the clear teaching of Lamb’s Chapel. As the court’s colloquy with counsel at oral argument made quite clear, the Poli (<HOLDING>); cf. AIDS Action Comm, of Mass., Inc. v. Options: A. holding that the military judge has considerable discretion to exclude relevant evidence under military rule of evidence 403 B. holding that 120 days notice was satisfied by 30 days work plus 90 days pay C. holding that the exclusion of peace activists from career days when military recruiters were permitted access was viewpointbased administration D. holding exclusion was harmless error E. holding exclusion was not ambiguous

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the exclusion of peace activists from career days when military recruiters were permitted access was viewpointbased administration
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: paid during the year, and concluded that these should be employed to deem the entire year-end distribution “after taxes,” hence subject to a zero percent rate. As stated above, this was error. See note 5, supra. The wife’s assertion that the husband misstated his rate in both years is unavailing here, as the dismissal of her first complaint for contempt and the finding that 40.3 percent was the correct rate in 2008 remains a ruling in the case. Absent a valid finding that distinguishes the two years, we conclude that this record fails to establish clear disobedience in 2009. We recognize that our cases do not require a clear showing of actual intent to disobey a court order to support a judgment of civil contempt. See O’Connell v. Greenwood, 59 Mass. App. Ct. 147, 150-151 & n.3 (2003) (<HOLDING>). See also United Factory Outlet, Inc. v. Jay’s Options: A. holding that a civil contempt defendant has a right to a jury trial when the act of contempt was not committed in the presence of the court and when the incarceration is in part punitive B. holding that the degree of the loss of use of a body part is a question of fact whether the loss is for all practical intents and purposes is a question of law C. recognizing civil contempt power under 105a D. recognizing that the question of the degree of intent that must be shown to support a judgment of civil contempt is unsettled E. holding that the question of guilty knowledge and especially intent to defraud may be shown by other than direct evidence

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that the question of the degree of intent that must be shown to support a judgment of civil contempt is unsettled
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Transaction Document to which the Bank is a party constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of the Bank enforceable against the Bank in accordance with its terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, receivership, conservatorship or other similar laws affecting creditors’ rights generally and, if applicable, the rights of creditors of federally chartered savings associations from time to time in effect or by general principles of equity.

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: explanation of his ‘legitimate reasons’ for exercising the challenges.” (quoting Texas Dep’t of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 258, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981))); State v. Higginbotham, 917 P.2d 545, 548 (Utah 1996) (listing the four factors discussed above) (citations omitted). Finally, if the proponent provides a sufficient explanation for the peremptory challenges, the trial court must determine whether the opponent of the peremptory challenges has proven purposeful discrimination. Purkett, 514 U.S. at 767, 115 S.Ct. 1769; Johnson, 125 S.Ct. at 2416; Higginbotham, 917 P.2d at 548. ¶ 16 Since deciding Batson, the Supreme Court has continually increased the scope of the Batson test. See Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400, 409-10, 111 S.Ct. 1364, 113 L.Ed.2d 411 (1991) (<HOLDING>); Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U.S. Options: A. holding that batson applies to a prosecutors use of peremptory challenges regardless of whether the stricken juror is of the same race as the defendant B. holding that the constitution prohibits a criminal defendant from engaging in purposeful discrimination on the ground of race in the exercise of peremptory challenges C. holding that a criminal defendant can bring a third party challenge to the peremptory striking of jurors based on race whether or not he is of the same race as the jurors who are struck D. holding that a defendants exercise of peremptory challenges is not denied or impaired when the defendant chooses to use a peremptory challenge to remove a juror who should have been excused for cause E. holding that it is impermissible to use a peremptory challenge to exclude a potential juror based on race

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that batson applies to a prosecutors use of peremptory challenges regardless of whether the stricken juror is of the same race as the defendant
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: exists when costs to the seller are in different in different markets; Mantex simply says that Commerce does not have to make such a finding. See 17 CIT at 1398, 841 F.Supp. at 1302 (“[A]lthough [the rebate at issue] may explain the company’s lower United States price relative to its home market, Commerce is not required to assume such a causal relationship exists.”) The reasoning of Smith-Corona supports Commerce’s COS adjustment in this case. See Smith-Corona, 1 Fed. Cir. (T) at 139, 713 F.2d at 1577 n. 26 (“[Ajbsent evidence that costs do not reflect [FMV], the Secretary may reasonably conclude that cost and value are directly related.”); see also Daewoo Elecs. Co. v. Int’l Union, 6 F.3d 1511, 1518-19 (Fed.Cir.1993), cert. denied 512 U.S. 1204, 114 S.Ct. 2672, 129 L.Ed.2d 808 (1994)(<HOLDING>). The difference in costs for sales to the Options: A. holding unemployment taxes accrued when employees were terminated not when the amount of compensation taxes are determinable B. holding that the trial court did not need to conduct an evidentiary hearing when the dispute could be resolved as a matter of law C. holding that taxes were a claim against the estate that had to be filed in probate court thus reversing an order requiring heirs to pay taxes on estate property because the district court did not have jurisdiction D. holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to require a defendant to pay all back taxes E. holding that commerce need not conduct an econometric study to measure the passthrough of indirect taxes to home market consumers

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that commerce need not conduct an econometric study to measure the passthrough of indirect taxes to home market consumers
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 contains the entire agreement between the Company and the Executive and supersedes any and all previous agreements, written or oral, between the parties relating to these subject matters. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the terms of the Restricted Share Award Notice, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control.

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: doubt that the ad calls for a vote against the candidate. We disagree with this approach. Buckley intended to protect issue advocacy which discusses and debates issues in the context of an election. Issue advocacy thus does not become express advocacy based upon timing. The right to freely discuss issues in the context of an election, including public issues as they relate to candidates for office, is precisely the kind of issue advocacy the Court recognized was beyond the reach of regulation. The Court explicitly observed that “[c\andidates, especially incumbents, are intimately tied to public issues involving legislative proposals and governmental actions.” Buckley, 424 U.S. at 42 (emphasis added). See Massachusetts Citizens for Life, 479 U.S. at 249 (unanimous Court on this point) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added). In a recent case involving Options: A. holding that a prior administrative decision actually decided ultimate factual issues that are essential to plaintiffs present claims and that issue preclusion therefore bars the relitigation of those issues B. recognizing that issue advocacy may include discussion of issues and candidates C. recognizing rule lls central goal of deterrence but noting concerns that it will spawn satellite litigation and chill vigorous advocacy D. holding that an applicants failure to include specific issues in his petition for review results in abandonment of any claims of error he might have raised regarding the decisions related to those issues E. holding that failure to include an issue in statement of issues did not bar the appellant from raising the issue in its opening brief

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that issue advocacy may include discussion of issues and candidates
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: (citations omitted) (“[F]ederal courts are the final arbi ters of federal law, and the question of tribal court jurisdiction is a federal question.”), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 943, 111 S.Ct. 1404, 113 L.Ed.2d 459 (1991); see National Farmers Union, 471 U.S. at 852, 105 S.Ct. at 2451-52. Second, it is not necessary to join the tribal court as a party to Pease’s suit for the simple reason that tribal judges, like state judges, are expected to comply with binding pronouncements of the federal courts. See, e.g., In re Justices of Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 695 F.2d 17, 23 (1st Cir.1982) (citations omitted) (“it is ordinarily presumed that judges will comply with a declaration of a statute’s unconstitutionality without further compulsion”); James v. Jones, 148 F.R.D. 196, 203 (W.D.Ky.1993) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the district court provided Options: A. holding that the state attorney generals duty to support the constitutionality of challenged state statutes and his duty to defend actions in which the state is interested do not constitute enforcement of the statute in question B. holding all members of beneficial society bound by state decree in class action including citizens of the state in which federal action seeking to enforce state decree was brought who were not parties to the state suit C. holding that state judges were not necessary parties to action challenging constitutionality of state laws relating to detention of juveniles D. recognizing that allegation of state action is a necessary element of a 1983 claim E. holding that an express provision preempting all state laws relating to railroad safety was broad and would preempt state claims that cover the same subject matter

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that state judges were not necessary parties to action challenging constitutionality of state laws relating to detention of juveniles
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 consideration for the commitments and agreements of the Commitment Party hereunder, you agree to cause to be paid the nonrefundable fees described in the Fee Letter on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth therein.

assistant: Fees
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: by the district court as the appropriate term of imprisonment”), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1023, 123 S.Ct. 534, 154 L.Ed.2d 434 (2002); United States v. Kings, 981 F.2d 790, 797-98 (5th Cir.1993) (per curiam) (affirming sentence of 150 months under § 5G1.2(d) where guideline range was 120 to 150 months, and where one count carried a 120-month statutory maximum and another count carried a 36-month statutory maximum); United States v. Jemison, 237 F.3d 911, 918-19 (7th Cir.2001) (vacating and remanding sentence due to district court’s failure to order consecutive sentences, but citing Joetzki in holding that, pursuant to § 5G1.2(d), the district court could have sentenced defendant "to 66 months (and a great deal more)”); United States v. Ervasti, 201 F.3d 1029, 1045-46 (8th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Nelson, 54 F.3d 1540, 1547 Options: A. holding that consideration by a sentencing court of acquitted conduct was appropriate in establishing the applicable guideline range or in determining the sentence to impose within the guideline range B. holding that the maximum revocation sentence is the top of the guidelines range C. holding that total punishment is the precise sentence determined by the sentencing judge from within the appropriate guidelines range and affirming a 63month sentence where a jury convicted defendant of five counts each with a 60month statutory maximum where the guideline range was 51 to 63 months D. holding that where the guideline range is higher than the statutory maximum sentence the court should depart from the lowest range that could support the statutory maximum E. holding that a sentence of 71 months is proper under 5g12d where guideline range was 57 to 71 months and where each of eight counts of conviction carried 60month statutory maximum

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that total punishment is the precise sentence determined by the sentencing judge from within the appropriate guidelines range and affirming a 63month sentence where a jury convicted defendant of five counts each with a 60month statutory maximum where the guideline range was 51 to 63 months
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 responsible party has met its burden. 6 . We note that CAFA-exception cases holding that "a rebuttable presumption' that a person’s residence is his domicile” are inapplicable to the determination of whether the amount in controversy is met here. Mason v. Lockwood, Andrews & Newman, P.C., 842 F.3d 383, 390 (6th Cir. 2016). In CAFA-exception cases, the court has necessarily determined that jurisdiction exists and is only considering whether the exceptions impose a limit. The Sixth Circuit in Mason explained as much. Id., 842 F.3d at 392 (noting that because "the local controversy exception is not jurisdictional ... a party asserting the exception does not encounter” presumptions against federal jurisdiction); see also Serrano v. 180 Connect, Inc., 478 F.3d 1018, 1023 (9th Cir. 2007) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted); cf. Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., Options: A. holding that when all federal claims have been dismissed the court should decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims B. holding that a federal court may adjudicate claims for which there is no independent basis for subject matter jurisdiction if the nonjurisdictional claims are related to other claims for which the does have jurisdiction C. recognizing that federal courts may decline to exercise jurisdiction where warranted by regard for federalstate relations D. 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 E. holding that cafa exceptions are nonjurisdictional because they require federal courtsalthough they have jurisdiction to decline to exercise jurisdiction when cafas threshold requirements are met

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that cafa exceptions are nonjurisdictional because they require federal courtsalthough they have jurisdiction to decline to exercise jurisdiction when cafas threshold requirements are met
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: been constitutional under the 1870 Constitution. Since the 1970 Constitution is also silent on the subject, a recall statute would likely be constitutional. The 1970 Constitution gives home rule units broad legislative powers and states that those powers are to be construed liberally. (Ill. Const. 1970, art. VII, §6.) Consequently, a home rule unit could enact a valid recall ordinance. Non-home rule units such as the city of Northlake do not have such power. The issue before this court, however, is not whether a recall procedure can be enacted by ordinance. The question is whether recall can be adopted by municipal referendum. In this respect, the powers of municipalities, whether home-ruled or not, are identical. (See Pechous v. Slawko (1976), 64 Ill. 2d 576, 582-83, 357 N.E.2d 1144 (<HOLDING>).) We find that article VII of the Illinois Options: A. recognizing district court application of the same rule B. holding that the referendum powers of home rule units and nonhome rule units are the same C. recognizing a referendum on a court judgment would violate separation of powers D. recognizing rule E. holding that federal credit unions are governmental units within the meaning 523a8

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the referendum powers of home rule units and nonhome rule units are the same
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: notwithstanding the foregoing , you agree that skype grants to the operators of public search engines permission to use spiders to copy materials from the skype website for the sole purpose of creating publicly available searchable indices of the materials , but not caches or archives of such materials .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The proceeds of the Loans will be used only for working capital and general corporate purposes of the Borrower and the Subsidiaries. No part of the proceeds of any Loan will be used, whether directly or indirectly, for any purpose that entails a violation of any of the Regulations of the Board, including Regulations T, U and X. Letters of Credit will be issued only to support the general corporate purposes of the Borrower and the Subsidiaries. The Borrower will not request any Borrowing or Letter of Credit, and the Borrower shall not use, or permit its Subsidiaries and its or their respective directors, officers, employees and agents to use, the proceeds of any Borrowing or Letter of Credit (a) in furtherance of an offer, payment, promise to pay, or authorization of the payment or giving of money, or anything else of value, to any Person in violation of any Anti-Corruption Laws, in any material respect, (b) for the purpose of funding, financing or facilitating any activities, business or transaction of or with any Sanctioned Person, or in any Sanctioned Country, in each case, to the extent that would be prohibited by Sanctions if conducted by a corporation incorporated in the United States or (c) in any other manner that would result in the material violation of any Sanctions applicable to any party to this Agreement.

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: David Egelhoff, the plan participant, designated his then-wife Donna, as his beneficiary. Shortly after they were divorced, David died in a car accident. David’s children from a prior marriage argued that, by virtue of the divorce, Donna was disqualified by Washington law from receiving the proceeds. The Court ruled that ERISA preempted the Washington statute and that state law cannot “bind[ ] ERISA plan administrators to a particular choice of rules for determining beneficiary status.” Id. at 147, 121 S.Ct. 1322. The Court emphasized that national uniformity was ensured by “ERISA’s commands that a plan shall ‘specify the basis on which payments are made to and from the plan,’ § 1102(b)(4).” Id.; see also Branco v. UFCW-N. Cal. Employers Joint Pension Plan, 279 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Nothing that we have said here is contrary to Options: A. holding that an employees claim for wrongful discharge based on the employers desire to avoid contributing to or paying benefits under the employees pension fund is preempted by erisa even though the claims are asserted under tort theories not erisa and seek damages only in the form of lost wages mental anguish and punitive damages not benefits under the plan B. holding that an employees protected interest in a pension vested before he or she became eligible to collect the pension C. holding a state workers compensation regime preempted by erisa to the extent state law applied to pension plans governed by federal law D. holding that erisa preempted a state court order awarding spousal interest in an employees pension proceeds E. holding that erisa completely preempted certain state law claims and finding that erisa preempted an employees common law tort and contract claim when the employee sought benefits under the employers disability policy

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that erisa preempted a state court order awarding spousal interest in an employees pension 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: the bank actually labeled the CD as “nontransferable” for reasons relating to such reserve and reporting requirements. But it does show that a “nontransferable” legend, by its very terms, does not necessarily preclude a depositor from transferring the CD to third parties in the ordinary course of business. Read & Lundy next argues that even if we adopt the majority view, the bank did not present sufficient evidence to establish that CDs, such as this one, that the bank stamped as “nontransferable” were nonetheless transferred and transferable in the ordinary course of business. We disagree because “[t]he question of whether a particular document qualifies as an instrument under the U.C.C. is a question of law.” In re Coral Petroleum, Inc., 50 B.R. 830, 837, 838 (Bankr.S.D.Tex.1985) (<HOLDING>). The test for transferability is “what Options: A. recognizing limits on the erisa preemption clause B. holding the district courts decision not to allow an expert to rely on a note found in a hospital record was within the courts discretion because the court found that the note was too unreliable to be used as the basis for an expert opinion C. recognizing that an expert may rely on an article because it is the expert who determines based on study and experience whether the article is reliable D. holding that nonnegotiable note qualified as an article 9 instrument despite the limits on its transferability E. holding that policy limits are not a defense to coverage and that policy limits define the amount of coverage

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that nonnegotiable note qualified as an article 9 instrument despite the limits on its transferability
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: Aug. 18, 2006), 988 So.2d 1078 (Ala.Crim.App.2006) ], held that equi le tolling is not available in a case such as this one. Moreover, because Rule 32.2(c) does not establish a jurisdictional bar, the trial court has the power to hear an untimely petition because the running of the limitations period would ‘not divest the circuit court of the power to try the case.’ Ex parte Seymour, 946 So.2d 536, 539 (Ala.2006). “Further, as Ward points out, under federal habeas corpus practice, the federal courts have held that equitable tolling is available for a § 2244 petition, notwithstanding that the word ‘shall’ appears in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(l)(estab-lishing procedures for petitions for the writ of habeas corpus). See, e.g., Baldayaque v. United States, 338 F.3d 145, 153 (2d Cir.2003)(<HOLDING>); Spitsyn v. Moore, 345 F.3d 796, 799 (9th Options: A. holding that where client was abandoned by attorney due to attorneys mental illness equitable tolling may be appropriate B. holding that attorneys mental illness may justify equitable tolling C. holding that equitable tolling under 2255 would be allowed if at all only for extraordinary circumstances D. holding that equitable tolling may be available where the attorneys behavior was outrageous or the attorneys incompetence was extraordinary E. holding that mental incapacity is an extraordinary circumstance that may warrant equitable tolling

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that equitable tolling may be available where the attorneys behavior was outrageous or the attorneys incompetence was extraordinary
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 trial court found in imposing the death penalty. (And, in any event, as the state trial court found: (1) San Martin had failed to establish that, when considering Abreu's affidavit and subsequent testimony, the State had knowingly forced Abreu to present perjurious testimony to the jury; and (2) regardless of when the plan was discussed, the time was more than sufficient to support the cold, calculated, and premeditated aggravating circumstance.) On appeal, San Martin has not made these arguments, and therefore has waived them. Isaacs v. Head, 300 F.3d 1232, 1238 (11th Cir.2002) (“Of the issues for which Isaacs received permission to appeal, he apparently chose to abandon all but eight for purposes of this appeal.”); Atkins v. Singletary, 965 F.2d 952, 955 n. 1 (11th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). The fact that he discusses the co-defendant's Options: A. holding that where a party does not adequately brief an argument we need not address it on appeal B. holding that a habeas petitioner abandons the claims he does not address on appeal C. holding that an appellant abandons an issue for purposes of appeal where he fails to argue it in his briefs D. holding violation of rule 23a does not entitle petitioner to habeas relief E. holding that a party abandons claims that he does not argue in his brief

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a habeas petitioner abandons the claims he does not address 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: agreement instruction discussed supra, a drug user instruction, and a prior felon instruction. See I R. Doc. 38, at 6, 9, 11. Both accomplices that testified against Petitioner in regards to Count 3 of the indictment were drug addicts or users and prior felons. We assume that the jury applies the law as given in the jury instructions to the facts of the case, and the jury instructions as a whole adequately warned the jury why the accomplices’ testimony could be particularly unreliable— drug use, former convictions, and the hope of gaining leniency under a plea agreement. In particular, the drug addict instruction specifically instructed the jury to consider testimony from a drug user with “great scrutiny.” Id. at 9. See also United States v. Smith, 692 F.2d 658, 661 (10th Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>). Though it does not figure large in our Options: A. holding that failure to instruct the jury that accomplice testimony must be carefully scrutinized weighed with great care and received with caution was plain and reversible error B. holding that it was not error for the court to give a substantive new instruction to the jury after deliberations began where the instruction was given in court with the defendant and his counsel present C. holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony D. holding that it was prejudicial error to fail to give such a cautionary instruction even where the defendant did not object at trial to the lack of such an instruction when the accomplice testimony was uncorroborated E. holding that district courts failure to give an addict instruction was not reversible error because the instructions to the jury on accomplice immune informant and felon testimony along with the general credibility instruction were sufficient to alert the jury to consider with special care and weigh with caution the testimony of the witness

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that district courts failure to give an addict instruction was not reversible error because the instructions to the jury on accomplice immune informant and felon testimony along with the general credibility instruction were sufficient to alert the jury to consider with special care and weigh with caution the testimony of the witness
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: Upon payment and performance of the Obligations in full, this Assignment shall become null and void and of no further legal force or effect, but the affidavit, certificate, letter or statement of any officer, agent, authorized representative or attorney of Lender showing any part of the Obligations remaining unpaid or unperformed shall be and constitute conclusive evidence of the validity, effectiveness and continuing force of this Assignment upon which any person may, and is hereby authorized to, rely. Borrower hereby authorizes and directs all tenants under the Leases, all guarantors of Leases, all insurers providing rental loss or business interruption insurance with respect to the Property, all governmental authorities and all other occupants of the Property, upon receipt from Lender of written notice to the effect that Lender is then the holder of the Note and that an Event of Default exists, to pay over to Lender all rents and other amounts due and to become due under the Leases and under guaranties of the Leases and all other issues and profits from the Property and to continue so to do until otherwise notified in writing by Lender. This right may be exercised without Lender taking actual or constructive possession of the Property or any part thereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan may be abandoned or terminated at any time by the Compensation Committee or the Board. The Compensation Committee, at any time prior to the termination of the Plan, may make such changes and additions to the Plan as the Compensation Committee shall deem advisable; provided, however, that except as provided in Section 17 hereof, the Compensation Committee may not, without approval of the Company’s stockholders, increase the maximum number of shares issuable under the Plan or modify the eligibility requirements for participation in the Plan. No termination or amendment of the Plan may, without consent of the holder of a right to purchase then outstanding, terminate or materially and adversely affect the Participant’s rights under the Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of a merger or a Change in Control, each outstanding Award will be assumed or an equivalent option or right substituted by the successor corporation or a Parent or Subsidiary of the successor corporation. In the event that the successor corporation refuses to assume or substitute for the Award, the Participant will fully vest in and have the right to exercise all his or her outstanding Options and Stock Appreciation Rights, including Shares as to which it would not otherwise be vested or exercisable, all restrictions on Restricted Stock will lapse, all outstanding Restricted Stock Units will fully vest, and, with respect to Awards with performance-based vesting, all Performance Goals or other vesting criteria will be deemed achieved at 100% of target level and all other terms and conditions met unless otherwise expressly provided for in the Award Agreement. If an Award becomes fully vested and exercisable in lieu of assumption or substitution in the event of a merger or sale of assets, the Administrator will notify the Participant in writing or electronically that the Award will be fully vested and exercisable for a period of time determined by the Administrator, and the Award will terminate upon the expiration of such period. For the purposes of this paragraph, the Award will be considered assumed if, following the Change in Control, the Award confers the right to purchase or receive, for each Share subject to the Award immediately prior to the merger or sale of assets, the consideration (whether stock, cash, or other securities or property) received in the merger or sale of assets by holders of Common Stock for each Share held on the effective date of the transaction (and if holders were offered a choice of consideration, the type of consideration chosen by the holders of a majority of the outstanding Shares); provided, however, that if such consideration received in the Change in Control is not solely common stock of the successor corporation or its Parent, the Administrator may, with the consent of the successor corporation, provide for the consideration to be received upon the exercise of an Option or Stock Appreciation Right or upon the payout of a Restricted Stock Unit, Performance Unit or Performance Share, for each Share subject to such Award, to be solely common stock of the successor corporation or its Parent equal in fair market value to the per share consideration received by holders of Common Stock in the Change in Control.

assistant: Change In Control
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: microsoft does not consider or accept unsolicited proposals or ideas , including without limitation ideas for new products , technologies , promotions , product names , product feedback and product improvements ( `` unsolicited feedback '' ) .

assistant: None