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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise disclosed by that certain Phase I environmental report (or Phase II environmental report, if required) delivered to Lender by Borrower in connection with the origination of the Loan (such report is referred to below as the “ Environmental Report ”), (a) there are no Hazardous Substances or underground storage tanks in, on, or under the Property and no Hazardous Substances have been handled, manufactured, generated, stored, processed, or disposed of on or released or discharged from the Property, except those that are (i) in compliance with Environmental Laws and with permits issued pursuant thereto (to the extent such permits are required under Environmental Law), (ii) de-minimis amounts necessary to operate the Property for the purposes set forth in this Agreement which will not result in an environmental condition in, on or under the Property and which are otherwise permitted under and used in compliance with Environmental Law and (iii) fully disclosed to Lender in writing pursuant the Environmental Report; (b) there are no past, present or threatened Releases of Hazardous Substances in, on, under or from the Property which has not been fully remediated in accordance with Environmental Law; (c) there is no threat of any Release of Hazardous Substances migrating to the Property; (d) there is no past or present non-compliance with Environmental Laws, or with permits issued pursuant thereto, in connection with the Property which has not been fully remediated in accordance with Environmental Law; (e) Borrower does not know of, and has not received, any written or oral notice or other communication from any Person (including a Governmental Authority) relating to Hazardous Substances or Remediation thereof, of possible liability of any Person pursuant to any Environmental Law, other environmental conditions in connection with the Property, or any actual or potential administrative or judicial proceedings in connection with any of the foregoing; (f) Borrower has truthfully and fully disclosed to Lender, in writing, any and all information relating to environmental conditions in, on, under or from the Property that is known to Borrower and has provided to Lender all information that is contained in Borrower’s files and records, including any reports relating to Hazardous Substances in, on, under or from the Property or to the environmental condition of the Property; and (g) there are no Institutional Controls on or affecting the Property.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been duly and validly executed and delivered by Seller and, assuming due and valid authorization, execution and delivery by the Company, this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of Seller enforceable against Seller in accordance with its terms, except as such enforceability may be affected by bankruptcy, insolvency, moratorium and other similar laws relating to or affecting creditors' rights generally and general equitable principles.

assistant: Enforceability
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: appear in their pleadings in the record before us. 20 . Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat. art. 4590i, § 1.03(a)(4) (“ ‘Health care liability claim' means a cause of action against a health care provider or physician for treatment, lack of treatment, or other claimed departure from accepted standards of medical care, or health care, or safety or professional or administrative services directly related to health care, which proximately results in injury to or death of a claimant, whether the claimant’s claim or cause of action sounds in tort or contract.”) (repealed 2003) (current version at Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.Code § 74.001(a)(13)); Diversicare Gen. Partner, Inc. v. Rubio, 185 S.W.3d 842, 849-54 (Tex.2005); Earle v. Ratliff, 998 S.W.2d 882, 885 n. 10 (Tex.1999). 21 . Diversicare, 185 S.W.3d at 849 (<HOLDING>). 22 . Garland Cmty. Hosp. v. Rose, 156 S.W.3d Options: A. holding that claim that hospital provided inadequate supervision leading to patients sexual assault by another patient constituted health care liability claim B. holding that claim against nursing home regarding patients death from spider bite fell within the statutory definition of a health care liability claim C. holding claim that negligent supervision caused assault was health care liability claim because it was inseparable from the health care and nursing services provided D. holding that negligent supervision is inseparable from the use of the motor vehicle E. holding that a negligent misrepresentation claim brought by an independent third party health care provider was not preempted by erisa

assistant: The best answer is C. holding claim that negligent supervision caused assault was health care liability claim because it was inseparable from the health care and nursing services provided
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 following: (i) where there is a contract of employment providing for a specific duration and termination without just cause occurs before expiration of-that duration, see Rosen v. Gulf Shores, Inc., 610 So.2d 366 (Miss.1992); (ii) where termination is retaliatory, because the employee reports or refuses to participate in an unlawful act,, see McArn v. Allied Bruce-Terminix Co., 626 So.2d 603 (Miss.1993); and (iii) where a handbook does not sufficiently preserve the at-will nature of employment and the employer “completely ignores” specific progressive disciplinary penalties for rule infractions, thus giving rise to contractual obligations, see Bobbitt, 603 So.2d 356. See Byest v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 4:13-CV-0009-DMB-JMV, 2014 WL 3891295, at *7 (N.D.Miss. Aug. 7, 2014) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff apparently contends that her claim Options: A. recognizing that the legislature can create statutory exceptions to atwill employment B. recognizing public policy exception to atwill doctrine C. recognizing exceptions to immunity D. recognizing doctrine E. recognizing three exceptions to atwill doctrine

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing three exceptions to atwill doctrine
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: Section 2Fl.l(b)(4)(B) was changed to include a two-point enhancement if the offense involved “a misrepresentation or other fraudulent action during the course of a bankruptcy proceeding.” U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2Fl.l(b)(4)(B) (2000). Thus, the District Court’s application of the 2000 Guidelines Manual resulted in a harsher sentence for Brennan than that called for by earlier versions of the Manual, potentially implicating the ex post facto clause. Nonetheless, when an amendment is a mere clarification, rather than a substantive chang e, application of the November 2000 Sentencing Guidelines would still not violate the ex post facto clause if the fraud continued after the effective date of the amendment. See, e.g., United States v. Moscony, 927 F.2d 742, 754 (3d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Zimmer, 299 F.3d 710, 718 Options: A. holding that application of an amended version of the guidelines to a conspiracy which continues both before and after the amendment does not violate the ex post facto clause B. holding that use of the guidelines in effect at time of sentencing does not violate ex post facto clause after booker C. holding that application of guidelines did not violate the ex post facto clause because rico offense was a straddle crime that continued before and after the effective date of the guidelines D. holding that the application of the guidelines in effect at sentencing rather than at the time of defendants conduct does not violate the ex post facto clause even if the current guidelines suggest a harsher sentence because the guidelines are only advisory not binding E. holding that parole guidelines are subject to the ex post facto clause

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that application of guidelines did not violate the ex post facto clause because rico offense was a straddle crime that continued before and after the effective date of the guidelines
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 exchange for the Company’s execution of this Agreement and Executive’s receipt of the consideration set forth in Section 4(b) and 4(c) hereof, Executive agrees to and hereby does release and discharge the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliated companies, and their respective owners, agents, employees, directors, officers and all their predecessors, successors and assigns (the “Released Parties”), from any and all claims, causes of action, damages, demands and recoveries of any kind, whether known or unknown, which Executive has, ever has had, or ever in the future may have and which are based on acts or omissions occurring up to and including the date on which Executive executes this Agreement, including, without limitation, any and all claims, causes of action, damages, demands and recoveries arising out of or relating to Executive’s employment with the Company and the termination thereof; provided that Executive does not waive any nonwaivable claims for whistleblowing, unemployment compensation or workers’ compensation benefits, if applicable. Included within the release set forth in the preceding sentence, without limiting its scope, are claims arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, as amended (“FMLA”), or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended (“ADEA”), or the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1989, as amended, or the Executive Retirement Income Security Act, or the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, Sarbanes-Oxley, Dodd-Frank and any waivable laws governing whistle-blowing or retaliation, or any other federal, state or local civil rights or employment law and/or contract or tort law. This release also covers and includes claims for breach of contract (express or implied), wrongful discharge, detrimental reliance, defamation, emotional distress or compensatory or punitive damages, and any claim for attorney’s fees, costs, disbursements and/or the like. Executive understands that this Agreement releases all claims based on facts or omissions occurring on or before the date of this Agreement, even if Executive does not, at the time Executive signs this Agreement, have knowledge of those facts or omissions.

assistant: Releases
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: we have jurisdiction to address the merits of Holder’s challenge to the court’s restitution order. In these circumstances, we think the legal principles are clear that state law determines whether a property interest exists in the first instance, but federal law determines whether and how that property may be attached. “Once it has been determined that state law creates sufficient interests in the taxpayer to satisfy the requirements of the federal tax lien provision, state law is inoperative to prevent the attachment of liens created by federal statutes in favor of the United States.” Drye v. United States, 528 U.S. 49, 52, 120 S.Ct. 474, 145 L.Ed.2d 466 (1999) (citing United States v. Bess, 357 U.S. 51, 56-57, 78 S.Ct. 1054, 2 L.Ed.2d 1135 (1958)); see id. at 61, 78 S.Ct. 1054 (<HOLDING>). There is little doubt under Missouri law that Options: A. holding that bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to control disposition of chapter 13 debtors property that is not property of the bankruptcy estate unless the property is related to the bankruptcy proceedings of the code B. holding that the right to disclaim property under state law does not defeat a federal tax lien because the taxpayer exercised control over the disposition of the property C. holding that a property right that comes into existence by court action such as a judgment lien does not relate back to some earlier date to destroy the priority of a federal tax lien D. holding that a state disclaimer law which applies retroactively and treats the disclaimant as having predeceased the decedent does not defeat a federal tax lien that has already attached to the disclaimants property E. holding that a taxpayers interest as an heir to his mothers estate constituted property or a right to property to which federal tax liens attached despite his exercise of the prerogative state law accorded him to disclaim the interest retroactively

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the right to disclaim property under state law does not defeat a federal tax lien because the taxpayer exercised control over the disposition of the property
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: state court findings of fact: §§ 2254(d)(2) and (e)(1). In reviewing evidence presented to the state court, we rely on § 2254(d)(2). See Kesser v. Cambra, 465 F.3d 351, 358 n. 1 (9th Cir.2006). Under § 2254(d)(2), a federal court “may not second-guess a state court’s fact-finding process unless, after review of the state-court record, it determines that the state court was not merely wrong, but actually unreasonable.” Taylor, 366 F.3d at 999 (discussing § 2254(d)(2)). Looking at the record before us, it was not unreasonable for the trial court and the California Supreme Court to credit Baroni’s testimony over Cunningham’s. A criminal defendant’s vague testimony, standing alone, does not demonstrate that an officer’s contrary version of the facts was wrong. Cf. Taylor, 366 F.3d at 1006 (<HOLDING>). The California Supreme Court also reasonably Options: A. holding that the state courts rejection of the petitioners ineffective assistance of counsel claim was an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence before the state court B. holding that the state supreme courts summary adjudication of habeas petitioners claims left intact the reasoning of the lower court and that the state is accordingly entitled to the benefit of the more thorough treatment of petitioners strickland claims in that court C. holding that the denial of petitioners appeal to the bia would have put a reasonable person in the petitioners position on notice that something was wrong with his attorneys preparation for the removal hearing D. holding that the state court unreasonably credited the officer when the petitioners attorney provided accurate corroboration of the petitioners version of the postarrest interview E. holding that attorneys admission to an element of the offense in the petitioners presence at a deportation hearing was binding on the petitioners

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the state court unreasonably credited the officer when the petitioners attorney provided accurate corroboration of the petitioners version of the postarrest interview
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 with respect to the material terms and conditions of the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents, the Company confirms that neither it nor any other Person acting on its behalf has provided any of the Purchasers or their agents or counsel with any information that it believes constitutes or might constitute material, non-public information which is not otherwise disclosed in the Prospectus Supplement. The Company understands and confirms that the Purchasers will rely on the foregoing representation in effecting transactions in securities of the Company. All of the disclosure furnished by or on behalf of the Company to the Purchasers regarding the Company and its Subsidiaries, their respective businesses and the transactions contemplated hereby, including the Disclosure Schedules to this Agreement, is true and correct in all material respects and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The Company acknowledges and agrees that no Purchaser makes or has made any representations or warranties with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby other than those specifically set forth in Section 3.2 hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any term or other provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced under any present or future Law, or public policy, (a) such term or other provision shall be fully separable, (b) this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision had never comprised a part hereof, and (c) all other conditions and provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be affected by the illegal, invalid or unenforceable term or other provision or by its severance herefrom so long as the economic or legal substance of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement is not affected in any manner materially adverse to any party. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced, the Parties shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the Parties as closely as possible in a mutually acceptable manner in order that transactions contemplated by this Agreement be consummated as originally contemplated to the fullest extent possible.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 475 U.S. 557 106 S.Ct. 1339 89 L.Ed.2d 521 Barbara Ann PAULUSSENv.George Ronald HERION. No. 85-88. Supreme Court of the United States March 25, 1986 PER CURIAM. 1 On The petition alleged that the daughter had been born out of wedlock, that appellee George Herion was her natural father, and that he had ceased making contributions to her support in April 1975. Appellee offered as a defense the time bar of the Pennsylvania statute of limitations, which at the time required that paternity actions be commenced within six years of the child's birth or within two years of the putative father's last voluntary support contribution or written acknowledgment of paternity. 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann., § 6704(e) (Purdon 1982) (repealed). The defense was sustained against appellant's contention that the statute violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution. The Superior Court affirmed, 334 Pa.Super. 585, 483 A.2d 892 (1985), and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania denied discretionary review. Appellant sought appeal in this Court, and, on October 15, 1985, we noted probable jurisdiction. 474 U.S. 899, 106 S.Ct. 224, 88 L.Ed.2d 223 (1985). 2 On October 30, 1985, Pennsylvania enacted 1985 Pa.Laws, Act No. 66, to be codified as 23 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 4343(b), which provides that a child born out of wedlock may commence a paternity action at any time within 18 years of birth. Appellee now concedes that he is subject to § 4343(b) and that, upon a showing of paternity, he would be liable for child support payments from the date paternity was established. Brief for Appellee 5. He contends, however, that, even on such a showing, he would not be liable for payments dating back to the date the initial petition was filed in 1980. 3 Our examination of Pennsylvania law leaves us uncertain as to the legal consequences of the enactment of the new 18-year statute of limitations. If, however, Pennsylvania were to interpret § 4343(b) to require support payments dating back to the filing of the original petition, the constitutionality of the 6-year statute of limitations would be irrelevant. Because Pennsylvania should have an opportunity in the first instance to resolve this issue of state law, and because we are reluctant to address a federal constitutional question until it is clearly necessary to do so, we vacate the judgment below and remand for further consideration in light of the intervening change in state law. 4 It is so ordered.

assistant: 9
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: Workers Union of New Jersey, Local 827 v. New Jersey Bell Tel. Co., 584 F.2d 31, 33-34 (3d Cir.1978); Burmah Oil Tankers v. Trisun Tankers, 687 F.Supp. 897, 899 (S.D.N.Y.1988); Hudson-Berlind Corp. v. Local 807, Affiliated with the Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 597 F.Supp. 1282, 1285-86 (E.D.N.Y.1984). Cases which have refused to apply issue preclusion to arbitrators have done so because the requirements for issue preclusion were not met. See, e.g., W.R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union No. 759, Int’l Union of the United Rubber Workers, 461 U.S. 757, 765, 103 S.Ct. 2177, 2183, 76 L.Ed.2d 298 (1983) (refusing to apply res judicata where arbitrator’s earlier award had exceeded his authority); McGraw Edison, Wagner Div. v. Local 1104, Int’l Union of Elec. Workers, 767 F.2d 485, 489 (8th Cir. 1985) (<HOLDING>). We recognize that the arbitrator had the Options: A. holding that an arbitrator was not bound by an earlier award involving a different contract and different union B. recognizing that consent decrees have a dual character that of contract and that of judicial decree subjecting them to different treatment for different purposes C. recognizing that the legislature would not generally use a different meaning for the same word in a legislative provision unless a different purpose was intended D. holding that the legislature intends different meanings when it uses different terms in a statute E. holding that upon vacating an arbitration award the court has the discretion to remand to the same arbitrator or different arbitrator

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an arbitrator was not bound by an earlier award involving a different contract and different union
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: denial decisions are supported by the substantial evidence in the administrative record and are in accordance with applicable law. And so, the Court GRANTS the government’s motion for judgment upon the administrative record and DENIES plaintiffs cross-motion for judgment upon the administrative record. A. The ABCMR’s Decisions Are In Accordance With Applicable Law And Supported By Substantial Evidence The administrative record demonstrates that the ABCMR’s decisions to deny plaintiffs military benefits claim are supported by the substantial evidence in the administrative record and are in accordance with the applicable statutes and military regulations. And so, the Court will not set aside the ABCMR’s sound decisions. Barnick v. United States, 591 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (<HOLDING>). As an initial matter, a review of the Options: A. holding the court will not disturb the decision of the abcmr unless it was arbitrary capricious contrary to law or unsupported by substantial evidence B. holding that under chevron step two courts may not disturb an agency rule unless it is arbitrary or capricious in substance or manifestly contrary to the statute internal quotations omitted C. holding that the citys decision was arbitrary and capricious when it was contrary to the evidence and based solely on speculation arising from prior unrelated acts D. holding that when the agencys decision was based on an erroneous and completely unsupported assumption the decision was arbitrary and capricious E. holding that evidence contrary to an administrators decision does not make the decision arbitrary and capricious so long as a reasonable basis appears for the decision

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the court will not disturb the decision of the abcmr unless it was arbitrary capricious contrary to law or unsupported by substantial evidence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not effect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid or unenforceable provision were omitted.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: loss as the result of allegedly mishandled claims.”); Charleston Dry Cleaners & Laundry, Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., 355 S.C. 614, 586 S.E.2d 586, 588-89 (2003) (We decline to recognize a general duty of due care from an independent insurance adjuster or insurance adjusting company to the insured, and thereby align South Carolina with the majority rule on this issue.”); Meineke v. GAB Bus. Servs., Inc., 195 Ariz. 564, 991 P.2d 267, 270-71 (Ct.App.1999) (same); Sanchez v. Lindsey Morden Claims Servs., Inc., 72 Cal.App.4th 249, 84 Cal.Rptr.2d 799, 803 (1999) (same); King v. Nat’l Sec. Fire & Cas. Co., 656 So.2d 1338, 1340 (Fla.Dist.Ct. App.1995) (same). Only a sparse minority of courts have held otherwise.. See, e.g., Morvay v. Hanover Ins. Cos., 127 N.H. 723, 506 A.2d 333, 335 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Brown, 58 P.3d at 223 (same); Cont’l Ins. Co. Options: A. holding insurance agent has no duty to advise insured of amount of insurance necessary to cover all potential losses B. holding that where the insurer retains an attorney to represent the insured pursuant to an insurance policy the attorney acts in the capacity of an independent contractor for the insured C. holding that an insurance policy providing that the insurance company would pay all reasonable expenses incurred by the insured at our request emphasis omitted did not establish an agreement that the insurer would cover attorney fees and costs to the insured in a declaratory action D. holding that independent insurance investigators owe a duty of care to the insured as well as to the insurer to conduct a fair and reasonable investigation of an insurance claim because insured could be harmed financially if investigations were performed negligently E. holding that an agent breaches its duty to use reasonable care and diligence in procuring insurance when it fails to provide an insurance policy that covers the contents of the insureds business as the insured had requested

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that independent insurance investigators owe a duty of care to the insured as well as to the insurer to conduct a fair and reasonable investigation of an insurance claim because insured could be harmed financially if investigations were performed negligently
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 officers received reports of a man walking wet and barefoot through a neighborhood while talking to himself. It is not a stretch to imagine that such a person could have needed medical assistance or could have been under the influence of drugs or alcohol or suffering from a mental illness. The officers located Cady, who matched the description in the reports, approached him, inquired into his identity and well-being, and let him leave without hindering his departure in any way. Although a 20-minute encounter strikes us as lengthy for such an inquiry, the duration of the encounter is reasonable in light of the fact that Cady engaged the officers in a discussion about religion and his rights. See United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 687-88, 105 S.Ct. 1568, 84 L.Ed.2d 605 (1985) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Robinson, 30 F.3d 774, 784 Options: A. holding that a six month delay was unreasonable B. holding that a five month delay was unreasonable C. holding that a 13 month delay was unreasonable D. holding that 20minute stop was not unreasonable where the suspects actions contributed to delay about which he complained E. holding that 20minute detention was not unreasonable where suspect gave misleading answers

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that 20minute stop was not unreasonable where the suspects actions contributed to delay about which he complained
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: hearing the director shall give notice of his determination to the person against whom the tax is assessed. [Emphasis added]. In this case, the Division’s January 26, 2004 letter denying review of the original assessment because the protest was filed out of time, makes plain that, at the time that the protest was first considered by the Division, the Director did not elect “of his own motion” to redetermine the tax assessed in the May 8, 2003 notice of assessment related to final audit determination. As an alternative remedy, a taxpayer may appeal an assessment directly to the Tax Court within ninety days of the action sought to be reviewed, and bypass the administrative protest. N.J.S.A. 54:51A-13 and -14. See Harris Corp. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 15 N.J. Tax 119, 127 (Tax 1995) (<HOLDING>). See also N.J.S.A. 54:82B-21(a) (sales and use Options: A. holding there is no statutory requirement that a taxpayer exhaust administrative remedies before filing a complaint in the tax court B. holding that an alien must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking habeas relief from detention C. holding an inmate must exhaust all available administrative remedies before filing suit and if exhaustion was not completed at the time of filing dismissal is mandatory D. holding that federal prisoners need not exhaust their administrative remedies before filing suit in federal court E. holding that exhaustion requirement is satisfied so long as prisoner exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to new claims asserted in an amended complaint before filing that complaint

assistant: The best answer is A. holding there is no statutory requirement that a taxpayer exhaust administrative remedies before filing a complaint in the tax court
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Loan Party will not, and will not permit any of its Subsidiaries to use the proceeds of any loan made hereunder for any purpose other than (a) on the Closing Date, (i) to repay, in full, the outstanding principal, accrued interest, and accrued fees and expenses owing under or in connection with the Existing Credit Facility, (ii) to pay a portion of the consideration payable in connection with the consummation of the DMS Acquisition, and (iii) to pay the fees, costs, and expenses incurred in connection with this Agreement, the other Loan Documents, and the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby (including the DMS Acquisition), in each case, as set forth in the Funds Flow Agreement, and (b) thereafter, consistent with the terms and conditions hereof, for their lawful and permitted purposes (including (x) that no part of the proceeds of the loans made to Borrowers will be used to purchase or carry any such Margin Stock or to extend credit to others for the purpose of purchasing or carrying any such Margin Stock or for any purpose that violates the provisions of Regulation T, U or X of the Board of Governors, (y) that no part of the proceeds of any Loan or Letter of Credit will be used, directly or indirectly, to make any payments to a Sanctioned Person or a Sanctioned Country, to finance any investments in a Sanctioned Person or a Sanctioned Country, to fund any operations of a Sanctioned Person or a Sanctioned Country), or in any other manner that would result in a violation of Sanctions by any Person, and (z) that no part of the proceeds of any Loan or Letter of Credit will be used, directly or indirectly, 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 the Anti-corruption Laws.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If Executive properly and timely elects to continue health and vision insurance benefits under COBRA following the Retirement Date, the Company will continue to pay the employer-paid portion of his COBRA premiums (i.e. at the same percentage and terms as paid by the Company as of the date of termination of employment) for continuation coverage for Executive (and, if they were covered as of the Retirement Date, for Executive’s spouse and any eligible dependents) through the Consulting Period; provided, however, the Company has the right to discontinue the payment of the premium and pay to the Executive a lump sum amount equal to the employer-paid portion of the current COBRA premium times the number of months remaining in the Consulting Period if the Company determines that continued payment of the employer-paid portion of the COBRA premiums is discriminatory under Sections 105(h) and 9815(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code. To the extent such health and vision coverage is continued, the Executive shall pay Executive’s portion of any costs of continuation consistent with the Company’s past practices.

assistant: Benefits
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: 366 U.S. 418 81 S.Ct. 1356 6 L.Ed.2d 386 James M. BUSHNELL, petitioner,v.O. B. ELLIS, Director, Texas Department of Corrections. No. 561. Supreme Court of the United States May 22, 1961 Percy Williams, Houston, Texas, for petitioner. B. H. Timmins, Jr., for respondent. On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court with directions to grant petitioner a hearing upon his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Uveges v. Pennsylvania, 335 U.S. 437, 69 S.Ct. 184, 93 L.Ed. 127; Cash v. Culver, 358 U.S. 633, 79 S.Ct. 432, 3 L.Ed.2d 557; McNeal v. Culver, 365 U.S. 109, 81 S.Ct. 413, 5 L.Ed.2d 445. 2 Mr. Justice CLARK, with whom Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER and Mr. Justice HARLAN join, dissenting. 3 This application for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus was filed as an original action in the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. Neither the record, the briefs, nor argument of counsel indicate that such an action has ever been filed in a District Court of Texas as appears to be required by Texas procedure. See Ex parte Rodriguez, 1960, 169 Tex.Cr.R. ——, 334 S.W.2d 294; Ex parte Fitzpatrick, 1959, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 376, 320 S.W.2d 683; Ex parte Brooks, 1919, 85 Tex.Cr.R. 397, 212 S.W. 956. The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals might, therefore, have been based upon an independent state ground. In this condition of the record, I would affirm the judgment without prejudice to the petitioner filing in any appropriate Texas District Court an application for a writ of habeas corpus to test out the validity of his detention. See Vernor's Tex.Code Crim.Proc. Art. 119. 4 Mr. Justice STEWART took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 1
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: To the fullest extent permissible under applicable law, each member of the Board shall be indemnified and held harmless by the Company from any loss, cost, liability, or expense that may be imposed upon or reasonably incurred by such member in connection with or resulting from any claim, action, suit or proceeding to which he or she may be a party or in which he or she may be involved by reason of any action or failure to act and against and from any and all amounts paid by him or her in satisfaction of judgment in such action, suit, or proceeding against him or her provided he or she gives the Company an opportunity, at its own expense, to handle and defend the same before he or she undertakes to handle and defend it on his or her own behalf. The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of any other rights of indemnification to which such persons may be entitled under the Company’s Articles of Incorporation or By-Laws, as a matter of law, or otherwise, or any power that the Company may have to indemnify them or hold them harmless.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of deferred adjudication in the same manner as a revocation hearing in which the trial court had not deferred an adjudication of guilt. See Act of May 28, 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., ch. 1308, § 5, 2007 Tex. Gen. Laws 4395, 4397. 2 . Wright filed a “Motion To Determine If Defendant Wishes To Withdraw His Plea Of Guilty” on December 5, 2005. This motion complains that Wright was incorrectly admonished regarding the range of punishment because the "Written Plea Admonishments & Waivers” incorrectly states the punishment as a first-degree felony. The record does not reflect any ruling by the trial court on this motion, and Wright did not appeal the trial court’s order placing him on deferred adjudication community supervision. See Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661-62 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999) (<HOLDING>); Davila v. State, No. 02-04-00471-CR, 2005 WL Options: A. holding that issues not raised before the trial court cannot be raised on appeal B. holding that the procedure provided for deferred adjudication is different from the other type or types of probation C. holding that complaint from original plea is required to be raised in appeal from trial courts order placing appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision D. holding that issues not raised in the trial court may not be raised later on appeal E. holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that complaint from original plea is required to be raised in appeal from trial courts order placing appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision
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 and was not prejudiced by the duration of the investigation. 35 Cowell also admitted her personal responsibility for keeping track of the scope of her privileges before the second HC. 36 Regarding Cowell’s argument that the IC exceeded the scope of its authority, the second ARC found the IC acted within the bylaws. 37 Mathews, 87 F.3d at 638 (stating that reports by a preliminary investigative committee and by an outside reviewer, even though they conflicted with a report prepared by the physician’s expert, were “not so obviously mistaken or inadequate as to make reliance on them that the informal procedures used throughout the review process leading to the revocation of privileges satisfied the adequate notice and procedures element of § 11112(a)(3)); Singh, 308 F.3d at 30, 43-44 (<HOLDING>); Smith v. Ricks, 31 F.3d 1478, 1487 (9th Cir. Options: A. holding that an issue was not properly before the court on appeal because the trial court did not have the opportunity to make any findings of fact regarding it B. holding that an evidentiary hearing is necessary only if the party requesting the hearing raises a significant disputed factual issue C. holding that procedures were adequate even though the physician did not have the opportunity to challenge the results of an audit before requesting a hearing D. holding that the district court did not give the plaintiffs an adequate opportunity to be heard where it failed to conduct an in limine hearing and denied oral argument on the evidentiary issues E. holding that the state courts factfinding procedure was adequate even though it did not hold an evidentiary hearing because hearing as used in 2254d does not require a trialtype hearing at which live testimony is presented and the accused has the opportunity to crossexamine witnesses

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that procedures were adequate even though the physician did not have the opportunity to challenge the results of an audit before requesting a hearing
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: omitted). “[C]onclusions of law drawn from the fundings of fact are . . . reviewable de novo.” Huyck Corp. v. Town of Wake Forest, 86 N.C. App. 13, 15, 356 S.E.2d 599, 601 (1987) (citations omitted). “A law enforcement officer may stop and briefly detain a vehicle and its occupants if the officer has reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity may be afoot.” State v. Jackson, 199 N.C. App. 236, 241, 681 S.E.2d 492, 496 (2009) (citation omitted). However, an officer’s determination regarding potential criminal activity must be objectively reasonable, and an officer’s mistaken belief that a defendant has committed a traffic violation is not an objectively reasonable justification for a traffic stop. See State v. McLamb, 186 N.C. App. 124, 127-28, 649 S.E.2d 902, 904 (2007) (<HOLDING>). A passenger in a vehicle which is stopped by Options: A. holding the fact that officers belief proved to be mistaken does not negate a finding of probable cause B. holding that an officers mistaken belief that the defendant was speeding was not an objectively reasonable purpose for a traffic stop C. holding that where the defendant obtained a nondefaulted debt under the mistaken belief that the debt was in default and where the defendants subsequent collection activities were based on that mistaken belief the defendant was a debt collector for purposes of the fdcpa D. holding questions about a drivers purpose for traveling were reasonably related to a traffic stop for speeding E. holding that a plaintiff must show his belief was objectively reasonable in light of the facts and record presented

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an officers mistaken belief that the defendant was speeding was not an objectively reasonable purpose for a traffic stop
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Vesting. On each Vesting Date set forth below, your rights with respect to the number of Options that corresponds to such Vesting Date, as specified in the chart below, shall become vested and such Options may be exercised, provided that you must be actively employed by the Company or an Affiliate on the relevant Vesting Date, except as otherwise determined by the Committee in its sole discretion, provided further that, in the event of your Termination of Employment by reason of death or Disability, all outstanding Options shall immediately become fully vested and immediately exercisable.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Stock Award granted hereunder shall vest on the vesting dates set forth above, provided that the Participant is employed by the Company or one of its Subsidiaries on the applicable vesting date (except as set forth in Paragraph 4 of this Agreement). The Participant shall be entitled to receive one share of Company Stock in respect of each vested Stock Award as soon as practicable following the applicable vesting date, but no later than the later to occur of (i) the end of the calendar year in which the applicable vesting date occurs or (ii) the fifteenth day of the third calendar month following the applicable vesting date.

assistant: Vesting