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: who are part of the public.” Summary judgment was therefore appropriately granted to the Town. Given that conclusion, there is no need to address VSC’s argument that the court erred in evaluating a different portion of the “public use” test set forth in American Museum of Fly Fishing. Affirmed. 1 It is true, as the dissent posits, that the meaning of the term “public use” has been fleshed out through our case law, and there is little statutory language to be construed. Nonetheless, the Court is bound to construe tax exemptions strictly against the taxpayer lest all taxpayers be burdened with the costs of conferring a benefit to select individuals rather than to the public at large. See, e.g., Delta Psi Fraternity v. City of Burlington, 2008 VT 129, ¶ 14, 185 Vt. 129, 969 A.2d 54 (<HOLDING>). 2 We are not persuaded, as the dissent is, Options: A. holding one who claims tax exemption has burden of showing entitlement to exemption B. holding a debtors claim for loss of consortium to be entitled to an exemption under the oklahoma exemption statute and collecting other bankruptcy decisions recognizing a debtor spouses loss of consortium as the basis for allowing an exemption under federal and various state exemption statutes C. holding that when interpreting tax exemption statutes we strictly construe the statute in favor of taxation and against exemption D. recognizing that the right to hold land without being subject to taxation may constitute a substantial detriment to the affected locality and a significant advantage to the landowner and that land use ought not to result in exemption from taxation absent the conferral of a substantial public benefit such as the tax exemption law was designed to foster quotation omitted E. holding act qualifies as exemption statute under exemption 3

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that the right to hold land without being subject to taxation may constitute a substantial detriment to the affected locality and a significant advantage to the landowner and that land use ought not to result in exemption from taxation absent the conferral of a substantial public benefit such as the tax exemption law was designed to foster quotation omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless forfeited pursuant to Section 3(b), the Deferred Stock Units shall vest in accordance with the following schedule: (i) an initial one-third (1/3 rd ) of the Deferred Stock Units shall vest on [insert], 2019; (2) an additional one-third (1/3 rd ) of the Deferred Stock Units shall vest on [insert], 2020; and (3) the final one-third (1/3 rd ) of the Deferred Stock Units shall vest on [insert], 2021.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to claims already barred by the previous statute of limitations at the time the Act was enacted. The majority of courts addressing this issue have found that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act does not revive claims which expired under the previous, one-year statute of limitations. See In re Enter. Mortgage Acceptance Co., LLC, Sec. Litig., 295 F.Supp.2d 307, 312-17 (2003) (dismissing plaintiffs’ claims because Congress did not intend for the Act to revive previously time-barred action); In Re Heritage Bond Litig., 289 F.Supp.2d 1132, 1148 (C.D.Cal.2003) (finding the Act did not apply to § 10(b) and § 20(a) claims already barred at the time of the Act’s enactment); In re Enron Corp. Sec. Derivative & “Erisa” Litig., No. MDL-1446, Civ.A.H-01-3624, 2004 WL 405886, at *17 (S.D.Tex. Feb. 25, 2004) (<HOLDING>); Glaser v. Enzo Biochem, Inc., 303 F.Supp.2d Options: A. holding that because the act lacked an expression of specific intent to apply retroactively the extended limitations period did not revive claims B. holding 1997 sra amendment does not apply retroactively to revive appellants previously washed out juvenile adjudications C. holding that apprendi does not apply retroactively D. holding that even though statute of limitations on claims brought by the kansas public employees retirement system explicitly applied retroactively it was not intended to revive lapsed actions E. holding that the protect act amendments to the standard of review apply retroactively

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that because the act lacked an expression of specific intent to apply retroactively the extended limitations period did not revive claims
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: CURIAM. Affirmed without prejudice to file a sworn motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 to address the scrivener’s error in the sentencing order for case number 02-2119CF10A. See Campbell v. State, 718 So.2d 886 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(<HOLDING>). POLEN, SHAHOOD and MAY, JJ., Options: A. holding that the failure of a written sentence to conform to the courts oral pronouncement cannot be raised in a rule 3800a motion B. holding that courts written sentence must conform to oral pronouncement C. holding that the trial courts oral pronouncement must conform to the written judgment D. holding that a trial courts changing of the written sentence to conform with the oral pronouncement of sentence is ministerial E. holding written judgment must conform to oral pronouncement

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the failure of a written sentence to conform to the courts oral pronouncement cannot be raised in a rule 3800a motion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice or other communication required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing, signed by the party giving such notice and shall be given or made (and shall be deemed to have been duly given or made upon receipt) by delivery in person, by courier service, by telecopy or by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested, with postage prepaid), to the respective parties at the addresses noted in the LLC Agreement.

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: “unless it is clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense,” id at § 2D1.1 cmt. n.ll(A). To determine the applicability of this enhancement, the district court may consider all relevant conduct. Id. at § lB1.3(a)(l)(A)-(B). Since .the court may consider all relevant conduct, it follows that the court’s assessment is not “limited to the charged conspiracy.” See, e.g., United States v. Shippley, 690 F.3d 1192, 1200 (10th Cir. 2012) (noting that “a § 2Dl.l(b)(l) enhancement applies if a dangerous weapon was present or possessed during uncharged drug trafficking activity that constitutes relevant conduct under § 1B1.3” (citing United States v. Roederer, 11 F.3d 973, 982 (10th Cir. 1993))); see also United States v. Mitchell, 528 Fed.Appx. 800, 806 (10th Cir. 2013) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis in original). Further, we have held Options: A. holding that the 2d11b1 enhancement is not limited to the charged conspiracy B. holding that the 2d11b1 enhancement was proper where a firearm and drugrelated items were found in the defendants residence where he had also engaged in conspiratorial conversations C. holding that the defendant on remand may show his eligibility for the safety valve reduction by a preponderance of the evidence even where a 2d11b1 enhancement applied D. holding that heightened evidentiary standard of proof is not required where the sentencing enhancement is based entirely on the extent of the conspiracy to which the defendant pled guilty E. holding that the notion of enterprise conspiracy has largely rendered the old distinction between single conspiracy and multiple conspiracy irrelevant to rico conspiracy charges

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the 2d11b1 enhancement is not limited to the charged conspiracy
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: the online reservation service is rendered by booking.com b.v. , which is a private limited liability company , incorporated under the laws of the netherlands and having its offices at herengracht 597 , 1017 ce amsterdam , the netherlands and registered with the trade register of the chamber of commerce in amsterdam under registration number 31047344 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in that it is not a ‘roving commission to do equity,’ ... a court is well within its authority if it exercises its equitable powers to enforce a specific code provision ... Thus, § 105 does not itself create a private right of action, but a court may invoke § 105 ‘if the equitable remedy utilized is demonstrably necessary to preserve a right elsewhere provided in the Code.’ (citations omitted). The Court acknowledges that many courts have held that § 105 does not create a private cause of action standing alone or in conjunction with other Bankruptcy Code sections. Those cases are not like this one, as this case is based on the use of § 105 in conjunction with the court’s contempt powers. E.g., Joubert v. ABN AMRO Mortg. Group, Inc. (In re Joubert), 411 F.3d 452 (3rd Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>); Walls v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., 276 F.3d 502 Options: A. holding that no private cause of action exists under 105 for fed r bankrp 2016 violations B. holding that no private cause of action exists under 105 for 524 violations C. holding that section 105 does not afford a private cause of action for 506bbased issues D. recognizing private right of action E. recognizing cause of action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that section 105 does not afford a private cause of action for 506bbased issues
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, collectively with the Exhibits hereto and the Proprietary Information Agreement, represents the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and shall supersede any and all previous contracts, arrangements, proposed terms or understandings between the Parties. In addition, this Agreement shall supersede the employment agreement between the Executive and Impax as of the execution of this Agreement by Amneal and Executive, and the Executive agrees to execute such documents as reasonably determined necessary or appropriate to affect such supersession without triggering any severance under such employment agreement. This Agreement (including any of the Exhibits hereto) may be amended, modified or replaced at any time by mutual written agreement of the Parties. In the case of any conflict between any express term of this Agreement and any statement contained in any plan, program, arrangement, employment manual, memorandum or rule of general applicability of the Amneal, 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: for turkish users shopping on http://www.underarmour.com.tr , only those terms and conditions agreed to by such users that are valid under turkish law will apply .

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: In consideration for the services performed by Executive during the Employment Period, effective January 1, 2019 the Bank shall pay to Executive an annual salary (“ Base Salary ”) of $475,000. The Base Salary shall be paid in approximately equal installments in accordance with the Bank’s customary payroll practices. Executive’s Base Salary shall be reviewed at least annually during the Employment Period for possible upward adjustment, and Executive’s Base Salary shall not be reduced without Executive’s consent. The term Base Salary, as utilized in this Agreement, shall refer to Base Salary as it may be increased from time to time.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Employment Term, the Executive shall serve as the Chief Operating Officer of the Company, reporting to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company (the “ Supervisor ”). In such position, the Executive shall have such duties, authority and responsibility as shall be determined from time to time by Supervisor of the Company, which duties, authority and responsibility are consistent with the Executive's position. The Company will seek to have the formal appointment of Executive to the Board of Directors (the “ Board ”) within ninety (90) days of the execution of this Agreement. The Company shall take all proper and legal actions to have Executive elected and remain a member of the Board during the Employment Term, subject to state and federal law and the bylaws of the Company, during the Employment Term, as long as Executive beneficially owns at least 3% of the common stock of the Company. At any time that the Executive elects not to serve on the Board, then the Executive’s right to a full voting seat on the Board will no longer exist and instead will be subject to the determination of the Board.

assistant: Positions
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 Executive shall be entitled to receive prompt reimbursement for any and all reasonable expenses incurred by him during the Term in performing services hereunder, in accordance with the policies and procedures then in effect and established by the Company for its senior executive officers. Any reimbursement that the Executive is entitled to receive shall (i) be paid as soon as practicable and in any event no later than the last day of the Executive’s tax year following the tax year in which the expense was incurred, (ii) not be affected by any other expenses that are eligible for reimbursement in any tax year and (ii) not be subject to liquidation or exchange for another benefit.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: You will receive an annual salary of $380,000, less applicable withholding, which will be paid in accordance with the Company’s normal payroll procedures. This salary will be subject to adjustment pursuant to the Company’s employee compensation policies in effect from time to time.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If a change in control of the Company occurs, and as a result the Administrator determines that the relative TSR calculation would no longer be fairly representative of the Company's performance, the Administrator may make such adjustments to the Performance Condition as it deems necessary in the calculation of the Company’s TSR.

assistant: Adjustments
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 Security Party hereby consents and agrees that if this Amendment or any of the Security Documents shall at any time be or be deemed by the Administrative Agent for any reason insufficient, in whole or in part, to carry out the true intent and spirit hereof or thereof, it will execute or cause to be executed such other and further assurances and documents as in the reasonable opinion of the Administrative Agent may be reasonably required in order more effectively to accomplish the purposes of this Amendment and the Security Documents.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Rossignol v. Voorhaar, 321 F.Supp.2d 642, 647 (D.Md.2004) (finding that' conduct undertaken for personal reasons by law enforcement officers while they were off-duty and driving their personal cars was outside the scope of their employment under Maryland law). Indeed, the Maryland Court of Appeals has held that an employer is not liable for an employee’s off-duty operation of the employee’s personal vehicle, even where the employee is negligent in driving his personal vehicle to or from his place of employment. Oaks v. Connors, 339 Md. 24, 32-32, 660 A.2d 423 (1995). Additionally, where an employee engages in criminal conduct, such conduct is typically considered outside the scope of employment. See Tall ex rel. Tall v. Board of Sch. Comm’rs, 120 Md.App. 236, 259, 706 A.2d 659 (1998) (<HOLDING>). In this case, Dyar was off-duty at the time Options: A. holding that inter alia employees criminal conviction for alleged tortious act demonstrated employee was not acting in scope of his employment B. holding that even when employee was driving employers vehicle employee was not acting within the scope of his employment absent evidence that he had undertaken a special mission at his employers direction C. recognizing the doctrine reaches even intentional torts such as an employees alleged assault provided the tortious conduct at issue occurred within the scope of employment D. holding that the doctrine of respondeat superior in maryland allows an employer to be held vicariously liable for the tortious conduct of its employee when that employee was acting within the scope of the employment relationship citations omitted E. holding that whether the tortious act was committed during the time the employee was on duty and whether the tortious act was committed while the employee was on the employers premises were both factors weighing in favor of finding the activity within the scope of employment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that inter alia employees criminal conviction for alleged tortious act demonstrated employee was not acting in scope of his employment
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 taxes, governmental assessments and other outstanding governmental charges (including, without limitation, water and sewage charges), or installments thereof, that could be a lien on the related Mortgaged Property that would be of equal or superior priority to the lien of the Mortgage and that prior to the Cut-off Date have become delinquent in respect of each related Mortgaged Property have been paid, or an escrow of funds has been established in an amount sufficient to cover such payments and reasonably estimated interest and penalties, if any, thereon. For purposes of this representation and warranty, real estate taxes and governmental assessments and other outstanding governmental charges and installments thereof shall not be considered delinquent until the earlier of (a) the date on which interest and/or penalties would first be payable thereon and (b) the date on which enforcement action is entitled to be taken by the related taxing authority.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 379 U.S. 130 85 S.Ct. 271 13 L.Ed.2d 333 INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM WORKERS OF AMERICA, INC.v.AMERICAN OIL COMPANY. No. 55. Supreme Court of the United States November 23, 1964 Rehearing Denied Jan. 18, 1965. See 379 U.S. 985, 85 S.Ct. 639. David E. Feller, Washington, D. C., for petitioner. Frederic D. Anderson, Indianapolis, Ind., for respondent. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. 2 Mr. Justice GOLDBERG took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 7
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 by each Credit Party of each Credit Document and each Revolving Loan Document to which such Credit Party is a party and the consummation of the transactions contemplated thereby, including the Augusta Drop Down (a) are within such Credit Party’s powers, (b) have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate, limited liability company or partnership action, (c) do not contravene any articles or certificate of incorporation or bylaws, partnership or limited liability company agreement binding on or affecting such Credit Party, (d) do not contravene any law or any contractual restriction binding on or affecting such Credit Party, (e) do not result in or require the creation or imposition of any Lien prohibited by this Agreement, and (f) do not require any authorization or approval or other action by, or any notice or filing with, any Governmental Authority except, in the case of clauses (d) and (f), to the extent such contravention or the failure to obtain authorization, approval or notice or take other action could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Change.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: judicial admissions should be “narrowly construed.” Lewis v. Kenady, 894 S.W.2d 619, 622 (Ky.1994). Whether a statement is a judicial admission is a question of law that we review de novo. Reece v. Dixie Warehouse and Cartage Co., 188 S.W.3d 440, 448 (Ky.App.2006). We disagree with the Court of Appeals that Dr. Witten’s testimony constituted a judicial admission of negligence. Although Dr. Witten admitted to slipping, he denies that it caused Mr. Pack’s hip to become dislocated. Dr. Witten testified that, soon after he slipped, he put Mr. Pack’s hip through a range of motion to confirm that he had not dislocated it. In fact, there was a disputed issue of fact among the witnesses as to whether the slip caused the dislocation. In particular, Appellants presented W.2d 767 (Ky.1970) (<HOLDING>); Hornbeck v. Food Basket No. 1, 494 S.W.2d 87 Options: A. holding that allegations of future injury must be particular and concrete B. holding that whether a customer was negligent in failing to observe a bundle of grocery sacks on the floor before stepping toward it is a jury question C. holding that negligence of a pedestrian in tripping over a concrete abatement on the premises of a grocery store was a question to be resolved by the jury D. holding that grocery store did not have duty to foresee and protect customer from rowdy children E. holding that negligence of a store customer in failing to perceive a strip of black substance was a question for the jury

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that negligence of a pedestrian in tripping over a concrete abatement on the premises of a grocery store was a question to be resolved by the jury
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: (quoting Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 309-10, 111 S.Ct. 1246), and forms the basis for the Government’s proof, the accused’s defense, and the trial court’s rulings. Indeed, whether a defendant decides to plead guilty .or instead exercises his right to trial by jury may depend on the charges he faces and his potential punishment. Thus, failing to notify a defendant of the crime of which he is accused “infect[s] the entire trial process,” Neder, 527 U.S. at 8, 119 S.Ct. 1827 (quoting Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 630, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993)), and undermines any confidence that the sentence imposed reflects a just outcome. Further, inquiry into whether an error of this nature was harmless is inherently unreliable. See Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. at 149 n. 4, 126 S.Ct. 2557 (<HOLDING>). Would Lewis have pled guilty if he had known Options: A. holding that the omission of an element is not a structural error subject to automatic reversal but rather where objected to is subject to harmless error analysis B. holding that it was reversible error for the trial court to consider cumulative error in assessing claims of ineffective assistance of counsel C. holding that errors not rising to level of plain error are to be considered in assessing cumulative error D. holding error was structural because of the difficulty of assessing the effect of the error E. holding that complete denial of summation amounts to structural error and that existing case law did not clearly establish the restriction of summation as structural error

assistant: The best answer is D. holding error was structural because of the difficulty of assessing the effect of the error
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: R relies only on a mis-cited Second Circuit case and an unpublished district court opinion. Second, Barr argues that he is not merely disputing a sentencing enhancement but is contesting his conviction on the second gun charge, which is proper under § 2241. Finally, Barr maintains that he is factually innocent of the second firearm conviction because an element of the crime was not proved. None of these objections is persuasive. The first objection is without merit because, even if the R & R did not properly cite any binding authority, it correctly identified the law in this Circuit. Subject matter jurisdiction under § 2241 is present only when the petition attacks the execution, rather than the validity of the sentence. See e.g. United States v. Barrett, 178 F.3d 34, 50 (1st Cir.l999)(<HOLDING>). Barr’s second objection is equally Options: A. holding that a 2241 petitioners claim was not cognizable under 2241 and therefore the district court lacked jurisdiction B. holding that subject matter jurisdiction under 2241 is present in the custodial court when the petition challenges the manner location or condition of a sentences execution C. holding that a petition under 2241 attacks the execution of a sen tence while a 2255 petition attacks the validity of a judgment and sentence D. holding that because henrikson is not challenging the fact or duration of his confinement subject matter jurisdiction is not present under 28 us 2241 E. holding that an attack on the computation and execution of a sentence must come in the form of a 2241 petition

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that subject matter jurisdiction under 2241 is present in the custodial court when the petition challenges the manner location or condition of a sentences execution
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: prong of Paragraph 1491(b)(1). See RAMCOR Servs. Group, Inc. v. United States, 185 F.3d 1286, 1289 (Fed.Cir.1999) (“§ 1491(b) ... does not require an objection to the actual contract procurement.... As long as a statute has a connection to a procurement proposal, an alleged violation suffices to supply jurisdiction.”); Angelica Textile Servs., 95 Fed.Cl. at 215 (“The phrase ‘in connection with’ is very sweeping in scope.” “[A] procurement ‘includes all stages of the process of acquiring property or services, beginning with the process for determining a need for property or services and ending with the contract completion and closeout.’” (quoting RAMCOR, 185 F.3d at 1289 (first quote); 41 U.S.C. § 403(2) (second quote))); OTI America, Inc. v. United States, 68 Fed.Cl. 108, 117 (2005) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, this court finds that it has Options: A. holding that the broad language of subsection 1491b demonstrated congresss expressed intent that the subsection encompass the entire procurement process B. holding that the language of the arbitration clause any controversy or claim arising out of was broad enough to encompass the plaintiffs claim alleging fraud in the inducement of the contract C. recognizing that subpart iia of the dol regulation overlaps with subsection i of the statutory definition D. holding that when the specification clearly disavows a feature that feature is outside the reach of the claim language even if the language might otherwise be broad enough to encompass the feature in question E. holding that statutory language is conclusive in absence of clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the broad language of subsection 1491b demonstrated congresss expressed intent that the subsection encompass the entire procurement process
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: these terms of service ( `` terms '' ) constitute a legally binding agreement ( `` agreement '' ) between you and airbnb ( as defined below ) governing your access to and use of the airbnb website , including any subdomains thereof , and any other websites through which airbnb makes the airbnb services available ( collectively , `` site '' ) , our mobile , tablet and other smart device applications , and application program interfaces ( collectively , `` application '' ) and all associated services ( collectively , `` airbnb services '' ) .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of the Plan will be construed, administered and enforced in accordance with ERISA and, to the extent applicable, the internal substantive laws of the state of California (but not its conflict of laws provisions).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: motion for appropriate relief was not proper because it was not made after a verdict had been reached. See State v. Handy, 326 N.C. 532, 535, 391 S.E.2d 159, 160 (1990) (motion for appropriate relief is a “post-verdict” motion); N.C.G.S. § 15A-1414(a) (1999) (motion for appropriate relief may be made “[a]fter the verdict but not more than 10 days after entry of judgment”). The Defendant’s motions, therefore, must be characterized as “pretrial” motions brought “prior to a trial that the Government had a right to prosecute and that... [Defendant was required to defend.” Sanford, 429 U.S. at 16, 50 L. Ed. 2d at 20. Accordingly, the State’s appeal of the trial court’s 14 January 2000 order is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause. See McGraw v. State, 688 So. 2d 764, 771 (Miss.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 830, 139 L. Ed. 2d 51 Options: A. holding that where a court considering a rule 12b6 motion relies on matters outside the pleading the motion must be treated as a rule 56 motion for summary judgment B. holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment C. holding that the trial court erred by granting the defendants motion to dismiss D. holding that motion to dismiss cannot be treated as summary judgment E. holding pursuant to sanford and serf ass that a defendants untimely motion for acquittal made subsequent to a jury deadlock must be treated as a pretrial motion and thus review of the trial courts judgment granting such motion is not precluded by the double jeopardy clause

assistant: The best answer is E. holding pursuant to sanford and serf ass that a defendants untimely motion for acquittal made subsequent to a jury deadlock must be treated as a pretrial motion and thus review of the trial courts judgment granting such motion is not precluded by the double jeopardy clause
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: ( ii ) any loss or damage due to viruses or other malicious software that may infect your device , computer equipment , software , data or other property caused by you accessing , using or downloading from the products , or from transmissions via emails or attachments received from us .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Promptly upon request by the Lender or Agent, take, and cause each other Loan Party and each of its Subsidiaries to take, such additional actions as the Lender or Agent may reasonably require from time to time in order (i) to subject to the Liens created by any of the Collateral Documents any of the properties, rights or interests, whether now owned or hereafter acquired, covered or intended to be covered by any of the Collateral Documents, (ii) to perfect and maintain the validity, effectiveness and priority of any of the Collateral Documents and the Liens intended to be created thereby, and (iii) to assure, convey, grant, assign, transfer, preserve, protect and confirm to the Agent and the Lender the rights granted or now or hereafter intended to be granted to the Agent and the Lender under any Loan Document.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: police officer is considered the employee of the applicant for the commission, § 4-909, and is generally limited to exercising police powers on the property. Huger v. State, 285 Md. 347, 352, 402 A.2d 880 (1979). Nevertheless, the police power itself is not so limited since the words “peace and good order,” contained in the statute, “ ‘permit a special policeman, when on his employer’s property, to enforce the criminal law generally.’ ” Id. at 351, 402 A.2d 880, quoting Gray v. State, 38 Md.App. 343, 349, 380 A.2d 1071 (1977), cert, denied, 282 Md. 732 (1978). When special police officers are enforcing the criminal law, they are exercising governmental powers which involve state action. See, e.g., Griffin v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 130, 135, 84 S.Ct. 1770, 1772, 12 L.Ed.2d 754 (1964) (<HOLDING>). Griffin involved special deputy sheriffs, Options: A. holding that if an individual is possessed of state authority and purports to act under that authority his action is state action B. holding that the state police is a state agency C. holding authority to transfer every asset of failed bank includes authority to transfer choses in action not assignable under state law D. holding that the district court was not required to state affirmatively on the record that it knew it possessed the authority to depart downward E. holding that while the fourteenth amendment is directed against state action and not private action the state action requirement is met in a civil action where state law is applied whether by statute or common law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that if an individual is possessed of state authority and purports to act under that authority his action is state action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, section headings used herein are for convenience of reference only and shall not be considered in construing this Agreement. Capitalized terms used, but not defined, in this Agreement shall be given the meaning ascribed to them in the Plan.

assistant: Headings
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: Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66, 78, 95 S.Ct. 2080, 2088, 45 L.Ed.2d 26 (1975) (emphasis in original) (citations omitted). Although the question has not been answered yet by the Second Circuit, the few courts that have addressed the issue, applying the four-part Cort test, have concluded that no private right of action should be implied under the FCPA. See Citicorp Int’l Trading Co. v. Western Oil & Refining Co., 771 F.Supp. 600, 606-07 (S.D.N.Y.1991) (“[N]o private right of action exists under the FCPA”); Lamb v. Phillip Morris, Inc., 915 F.2d 1024, 1027-30 (6th Cir.1990) (“[N]one of the Cort factors supports ... private right of action theory_”), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1086, 111 S.Ct. 961, 112 L.Ed.2d 1048 (1991); McLean v. International Harvester Co., 817 F.2d 1214, 1219 (5th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). Applying the four-part Cort test below, we Options: A. recognizing private right of action B. recognizing that legislative history is not used to create ambiguity where statutory language is clear C. holding that neither the language of the statute nor its legislative history suggests that appointment is permissible only in some limited set of circumstances D. holding that the legislative history under the act indicates that liquidated damages are intended to be punitive in nature E. holding that neither the language nor the legislative history of the fcpa indicates the congressional intent to create a private right of action

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that neither the language nor the legislative history of the fcpa indicates the congressional intent to create a private right of action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be deemed an original and it shall not be necessary in making proof of this Agreement to produce or account for more than one such counterpart. Delivery of an executed counterpart of this Agreement by telecopy or electronic mail by any party hereto shall be effective as such party’s original executed counterpart.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The language used in this Agreement will be deemed to be the language chosen by the parties to express their mutual intent, and no rules of strict construction will be applied against any party. No specific representation or warranty shall limit the generality or applicability of a more general representation or warranty. Each and every reference to unit prices, Common Units and any other numbers in this Agreement that relate to the Common Units shall be automatically adjusted for any unit splits, unit dividends, unit combinations, recapitalizations or other similar transactions that occur with respect to the Common Units after the date of this Agreement. It is expressly understood and agreed that for all purposes of this Agreement, and without implication that the contrary would otherwise be true, neither transactions nor purchases nor sales shall include the location and/or reservation of borrowable Common Units.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The issuance and transfer of shares of Common Stock in connection with the RSUs shall be subject to compliance by the Company and the Grantee with all applicable requirements of federal and state securities laws and with all applicable requirements of any stock exchange on which the Company's shares of Common Stock may be listed. No shares of Common Stock shall be transferred unless and until any then applicable requirements of state and federal laws and regulatory agencies have been fully complied with to the satisfaction of the Company and its counsel. The Company will ensure that a sufficient number of shares of its common stock are registered on Form S-8 prior to the vesting of any RSU.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Company may request that Bank make enhancements, modifications, and upgrades to Bank Information Systems, including payment, billing, and other systems and services Bank uses to operate the Plan and fulfill its duties under this Agreement. Any such enhancements, modifications, or upgrades agreed to by Bank shall be made on terms, including fees, to be mutually agreed upon by the Parties.

assistant: Modifications
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 a material inducement to Landlord entering into this Amendment, Tenant represents and certifies to Landlord that as of the date hereof: (i) the Lease, as modified hereby, contains the entire agreement between the parties hereto relating to the Premises and that there are no other agreements between the parties relating to the Premises, the Lease or the Building which are not contained or referred to herein or in the Lease, (ii) Landlord is not in default in any respect in any of the terms, covenants and conditions of the Lease; (iii) Tenant has no existing setoffs, counterclaims or defenses against Landlord under the Lease; (iv) Tenant has not assigned or pledged its leasehold interest under the Lease, or sublet or licensed or granted any other occupancy rights with respect to any or all of the Premises; (v) no consent or approval of any third party or parties is required in order for Tenant to enter into and be bound by this Amendment; and (vi) Tenant is not, and the performance by Tenant of its obligations hereunder shall not render Tenant, insolvent within the meaning of the United States Bankruptcy Code, the Internal Revenue Code or any other applicable law, code or regulation.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Eastland v. TVA, 704 F.2d 613, 618 (11th Cir.), opinion modified and reh’g denied, 714 F.2d 1066 (1983), cert. denied sub nom. James v. TVA, 465 U.S. 1066, 104 S.Ct. 1415, 79 L.Ed.2d 741 (1984)). As the Supreme Court stated in Teamsters, [s]tatistics showing racial or ethnic imbalance are probative ... [in employment discrimination cases] only because such imbalance is often a telltale sign of purposeful discrimination; absent explanation, it is ordinarily to be expected that nondiscriminatory hiring practices will in time result in a work force more or less representative of the racial and ethnic composition of the population in the community from which employees are hired. 431 U.S. at 340 n. 20, 97 S.Ct. at 1857 n. 20; accord Croker v. Boeing Co., 662 F.2d 975, 991 (3d Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>) (citing Wetzel v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 508 Options: A. holding that the burden of establishing prima facie case of discriminatory treatment may be satisfied by minimal showing B. holding that direct evidence of discrimination is not required to prove discrimination in mixed motive cases under title vii C. holding proof of racially discriminatory intent or purpose required to show equal protection violation D. holding that when plaintiffs allege classwide racially discriminatory treatment in violation of title vii proof of discriminatory motive is essential although the burden may be met in some situations by presentation of statistical evidence that permits an inference of racial discrimination E. recognizing that the test for intentional discrimination in suits under 1981 is the same as the formulation used in title vii discriminatory treatment cases

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that when plaintiffs allege classwide racially discriminatory treatment in violation of title vii proof of discriminatory motive is essential although the burden may be met in some situations by presentation of statistical evidence that permits an inference of racial discrimination
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: Buyer is a corporation duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of Delaware and has all requisite corporate power and authority to own its property and to carry on its business as it is now being conducted.

assistant: Organizations