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: mortgage. MERS has disavowed any interest in the debt, including the right to receive payment or otherwise service the loan. Even to the extent MERS is an agent of the note holder, its rights and duties concern only legal title to the mortgage, not the note or beneficial interest in the mortgage. See Saunders, 2 A.3d at 295. Without a claim to the underlying debt, MERS therefore cannot exercise the power of sale, regardless of the language in the mortgage contract giving it this power. See Saurman, 292 Mich.App. at 328-29, 807 N.W.2d 412. That the mortgagor consented to this contractual language does not operate as a waiver of the law’s protection against foreclosure by the wrong entity. Cf. Henry v. Mansfield Beauty Acad., Inc., 353 Mass. 507, 511, 233 N.E.2d 22 (1968) (Wilkins, C.J.) (<HOLDING>). Yet, it cannot be that no party may exercise Options: A. holding that employees may not contract away their flsa rights B. holding that afteracquired evidence may completely bar a claim for breach of the employment contract because the employers duty arises from the contract itself and falls with that contract C. holding that a party may not contract away the protection that a statute is intended to afford him nor may the other party to the contract exempt itself from its duty to comply with such statute D. holding that person who is not party to contract does not have standing to challenge contract E. holding that prevailing party to contract dispute may recover attorneys fees either pursuant to contract or pursuant to statute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a party may not contract away the protection that a statute is intended to afford him nor may the other party to the contract exempt itself from its duty to comply with such statute
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: missing. Even McGreal found the purportedly missing reports in the Liquor Commission files. Chief Wood and Lt. Snooks also point out that McGreal filed Judicial Inquiry Board complaint about Judge Sterba without fully investigating the circumstances. McGreal’s letter highlighted the differences between the sentence that Sean Taylor actually received and the one that Lt. Snooks related to McGreal. McGreal then drew the inference that these differences were in response to McGreal’s initial inquiries into the matter, instead of a simple mistake on the part of Lt. Snooks. Chief Wood and Lt. Snooks argue that McGreal’s speech was motivated by personal interests in making these statements, and therefore the First Amendment does not protect the speech. See e.g. Kokkinis, 185 F.3d at 844-45 (<HOLDING>). For example, Chief Wood and Lt. Snooks submit Options: A. holding that if the speech in question does not address a matter of public concern there is no first amendment violation B. holding that even though speech was motivated by personal grievances it would still be protected conduct if it dealt with public concerns C. holding that speech addressing a private interest within a letter containing matters of public interest was protected and noting that we have emphasized that speech of public importance is only transformed into a matter of private concern when it is motivated solely by the speakers personal interests quotations omitted D. holding that public speech motivated by personal displeasure with policies was not covered by the first amendment E. recognizing criticisms of public officials is at core of speech protected by first amendment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that public speech motivated by personal displeasure with policies was not covered by the first amendment
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, after June 19, 2018 (in the case of the Series A Exchangeable Preferred Limited Partnership Interest and the Series B Exchangeable Preferred Limited Partnership Interest) and after September 26, 2018 (in the case of the Series C Exchangeable Preferred Limited Partnership Interest and the Series D Exchangeable Preferred Limited Partnership Interest), the outstanding Newmark Class A Common Stock shall have been changed by reason of any reclassification, recapitalization, stock split, split-up, combination or exchange of stock, or a dividend payable in securities of Newmark shall be declared with a record date within such period, or any similar event shall have occurred, the calculation set forth in Section 9.01(b) and any other similarly dependent items, as the case may be, shall be adjusted to provide the holder of the applicable Exchangeable Preferred Limited Partnership Interest with the same economic rights as was contemplated by this Agreement, the Series A/B Parent Agreement or the Series C/D Parent Agreement, as applicable, and the Variable Forward Transaction Confirmation prior to such event.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: review of willfulness is problematic. The panel is divided over the strength of Gore’s joint inventorship defense. Each side advances a sound argument about whether the evidence in this case raises a “substantial question” of joint inventorship. And the district court, likewise, provided a thorough and well-reasoned opinion. If one of these several reasonable opinions must ultimately govern, it should be the opinion of the district judge, whose assessment of litigation positions is informed by trial experience and who has “lived with the case over a prolonged period of time.” Highmark, 134 S.Ct. at 1748. A more deferential standard of review would be consistent with the standards for reviewing mixed questions of law and fact in other contexts. See, e.g., Highmark, 134 S.Ct. at 1748-49 (<HOLDING>); Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 558, 108 Options: A. holding abuse of discretion is the proper standard for reviewing award of attorney fees in patent cases although questions of law may in some cases be relevant B. holding proper basis for award of fees C. holding that the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion D. holding that a court has broad discretion in awarding attorney fees under the eaja but is not required to make an award in all cases where a party seeks supplemental or increased fees E. holding that abuse of discretion is the correct standard in reviewing a district court order disqualifying the district attorney for an appearance of impropriety

assistant: The best answer is A. holding abuse of discretion is the proper standard for reviewing award of attorney fees in patent cases although questions of law may in some cases be relevant
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 representations and warranties shall survive each Closing and the delivery of the Notes until, with respect to the Purchaser, the Notes held by the Purchaser have been paid in full or converted into Underlying Shares, at which time they shall expire and shall no longer be of any force or effect.

assistant: Survival
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 facts alleged:... Although we draw any reasonable inferences available on the face of the complaint in the investors’ favor, we also must look to plausible, non-culpable explanations for the defendant’s conduct in evaluating an inference of scienter.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Court must not scrutinize each of Plaintiffs’ allegations in isolation, but rather assess all of the allegations holistically. Tellabs, 551 U.S. at 326, 127 S.Ct: 2499. Finally, the “complaint must allege facts supporting a strong inference of scienter for each defendant with respect to each violation.” Mizzaro, 544 F.3d at 1238. Thus, the group pleading doctrine does not apply to the PSLRA’s scienter requirements. In re Sunbeam Sec. Litig., 89 F.Supp.2d 1326, 1341 (SD.Fla.1999) (<HOLDING>); Druskin, 299 F.Supp.2d at 1322 (same). As a Options: A. holding the pslra standard for pleading scienter is more stringent than the second circuits standard prior to the act and that motive and opportunity is not an independent basis to show defendants had scienter B. holding that the plaintiffs failed to meet rule 9bs particularity requirement where they did not present any evidence at an individualized transactional level C. holding that the federal false claims act is an antifraud statute to which rule 9bs heightened pleading requirements apply D. holding that the group pleading doctrine did not survive the pslra because it cannot be reconciled with the pslras requirement that plaintiff state facts with particularity as to each alleged act or omission by the defendant E. holding that the group pleading doctrine survives the pslra as to rule 9bs particularity requirements but does not apply to the pslras scienter requirements

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the group pleading doctrine survives the pslra as to rule 9bs particularity requirements but does not apply to the pslras scienter requirements
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall assign its rights and obligations hereunder to any person or entity that succeeds to all or substantially all of the Company’s business or that aspect of the Company’s business in which Executive is principally involved. Executive may not assign Executive’s rights and obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Company.

assistant: Assignments
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: Commencing on Date: May 16, 2017 (the “ Commencement Date ”), you will be employed as the Company’s Chief Financial Officer and will report to the Board of Directors (the “ Board ”) of the Company. You will report to and take direction from at least 66% of the Board. In addition, subject to this Agreement, you may be terminated by at least 66% of the Board. You agree to perform such duties and responsibilities commensurate with your position and as may be reasonably requested by the Board from time to time. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, you will be involved in planning, developing, implementing and expanding the financial operations and reporting obligations of the Company.

assistant: Titles
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: Dowling, 459 F.2d 190, 196 (7th Cir.1972); but see Note, Intracorporate Conspiracies Under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(c), 92 Harv.L.Rev. 470 (1978). But this reasoning does not apply at all to a partnership. A corporation is a distinct and fictional legal entity; a partnership is not distinct from its members at all. We decline, therefore, to find that the dictum to the contrary in Clark v. Universal Builders, Inc., 409 F.Supp. 1274, 1279 (N.D. 111.1976), makes the allegation of conspiracy here frivolous. Moreover, it would be anomalous in any case to permit an entity which was established for the very purpose of engaging in a discriminatory act to be insulated, and to insulate its members, from liability as conspirators, by virtue of its establishment. See Dombrowski v. Dowling, 459 F.2d at 196 (<HOLDING>). Additionally, the State’s pleading that Mrs. Options: A. holding to that effect with respect to rule 64 B. recognizing the rule and the exception but holding facts did not support claim to exception C. recognizing exception D. recognizing that when the corporations management or its shareholders are deadlocked with respect to a particular issue courts have realigned such corporations as party plaintiffs E. recognizing a similar exception to its rule with respect to corporations

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing a similar exception to its rule with respect to corporations
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: Subject to Section 8.10 , the Administrative Agent and the Lenders may disclose the Loan Documents and any financial or other information relating to the Loan Parties to each other or to any potential Participant or Assignee Lender.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Plan shall terminate on the tenth anniversary of the date of its initial adoption by the Board, unless earlier terminated by action of the Board. No Option may be granted during any period of suspension of the Plan or after termination of the Plan. The Plan will be submitted for the approval of the Company’s stockholders within 12 months after the date of the Board’s initial adoption of the Plan. Options may be granted prior to such stockholder approval; provided, however, that such Options shall not be exercisable prior to the time when the Plan is approved by the stockholders; provided further that if such approval has not been obtained by the end of said 12-month period, all Options previously granted under the Plan shall thereupon be canceled and become null and void.

assistant: Terms
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 agrees that the Executive shall be reasonably available to testify truthfully on behalf of the Employers or any affiliate in any action, suit, or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative, or investigative, and to assist the Employers or any affiliate in all reasonable respects in any such action, suit or proceeding, by providing information and meeting and consulting with the Board, or their representatives or counsel, or representatives or counsel of the Employers or any affiliate, as requested; provided, however, that the same does not materially interfere with the Executive’s then-current professional activities, and provided that the Executive is reimbursed for any reasonable costs and expenses associated with such cooperation.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: You agree not to deliberately defame or disparage in public comments any of the Company or any of their respective officers, directors, members, executives or employees. You agree to reasonably cooperate with the Company (at no expense to you) in refuting any defamatory or disparaging remarks by any third party made in respect of the Company or their respective directors, members, officers, executives or employees.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: conducting joint trials in conspiracy cases, which offsets to some extent the government’s level of culpability. While the government arguably may be responsible under Barker for the delay in this case, we cannot find that that responsibility weighs heavily against the government. There is absolutely no evidence of bad faith by the government. The reasons for delay in this case were, at worst, neutral reasons. In addition, the government’s actions were taken in pursuit of a valid and important judicial policy favoring joint trials. Given these facts, we conclude that even if the government is ultimately responsible for the delay under Barker, the reasons for delay do not weigh heavily against the government and do not excuse a showing of actual prejudice. See Mitchell, 769 F.2d at 1547 (<HOLDING>). 2. Prejudice Appellant concedes that he Options: A. holding that a twoyear delay weighed heavily against the government when the arresting officer knew where the defendant lived and worked and made only weak efforts to contact the defendant B. holding the government must demonstrate the defendant knew of the characteristics of the firearm that required it to be registered C. holding suppression not required where the government mailed the required notice 34 days after the 90day statutory period because defendant had access to the recorded calls and transcripts and failed to demonstrate actual prejudice D. holding that a sixyear delay caused by negligence weighed heavily against the government E. holding that a defendant was properly required to demonstrate prejudice where only two of the first three barker factors weighed heavily against the government

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a defendant was properly required to demonstrate prejudice where only two of the first three barker factors weighed heavily against the government
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: (1991) (court addressing ICFA unfairness claim must consider whether challenged practice “offends public policy as established by statutes, the common law or otherwise, or, in other words, whether it is at least within the penumbra of some established concept of unfairness”); ABC Bus. Forms, Inc. v. Pridamor, Inc., 2009 WL 4679477, at *1 (N.D.Ill. Dec. 1, 2009). Under this admittedly amorphous standard — which, having been adopted by the Illinois state courts, governs this court’s analysis under the Ene doctrine — a plaintiff may predicate an ICFA unfairness claim on violations of other statutes or regulations, like HAMP and IHPA, that themselves do not allow for private enforcement. See Gainer Bank, N.A. v. Jenkins, 284 Ill.App.3d 500, 219 Ill.Dec. 809, 672 N.E.2d 317, 318-19 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Ornelas v. Safeway Ins. Co., 1988 WL 102232, Options: A. holding that a private plaintiff may not being an action under the family educational rights and privacy act of 1974 because that statute does not create personal rights to enforce under 42 usc 1983 B. holding that the sensible and popular understanding of what a motor vehicle accident entails necessarily involves the motor vehicle being operated as a motor vehicle C. holding that the statutory definition of motor vehicle is not controlling D. holding that plaintiff may predicate an icfa claim on defendants violation of the illinois motor vehicle retail installment sales act which itself does not allow for private rights of action E. holding that where statutory remedies exist private employees do not have a private cause of action for violation of state constitutional rights

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that plaintiff may predicate an icfa claim on defendants violation of the illinois motor vehicle retail installment sales act which itself does not allow for private rights 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: All payments to be made by the Borrowers shall be made free and clear of and without condition or deduction for any counterclaim, defense, recoupment or setoff. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all payments by the Borrowers hereunder shall be made to the Administrative Agent for the account of the respective Lenders to which such payment is owed, at the Administrative Agent’s Office in immediately available funds not later than 2:00 p.m. on the date specified herein. The Administrative Agent will promptly distribute to each Lender its Applicable Percentage in respect of the relevant Facility (or other applicable share as provided herein) of such payment in like funds as received by wire transfer to such Lender’s Lending Office. All payments received by the Administrative Agent after 2:00 p.m. shall be deemed received on the next succeeding Business Day and any applicable interest or fee shall continue to accrue. Except as otherwise specifically provided for in this Agreement, if any payment to be made by the Borrowers shall come due on a day other than a Business Day, payment shall be made on the next following Business Day, and such extension of time shall be reflected in computing interest or fees, as the case may be.

assistant: General
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: as fact for more than 200 years.” (Id. at 7). It is clear that the claims of excessive noise levels and the analysis of the OSHA regulations dealing with time weighted averages “present technical issues beyond the common experience and understanding of the average jury.” In re Amtrak “Sunset Ltd.” Train Crash, 188 F.Supp.2d at 1347. Although fellow employees with extensive experience in the Patchogue Yard may be able to offer testimony on their subjective impressions of the noise level of the DE and DM warning devices, they lack the technical expertise necessary to analyze whether the decibel levels of the horns were in fact higher than those of the older trains’ horns or whether these horns caused plaintiffs loss of hearing. See Thirkill v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc. 950 F.Supp. at 1107 (<HOLDING>). While plaintiffs expert, Dr. Danziger, opines Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs experts were not qualified to offer a medical opinion as to the cause of death because they are not physicians nor otherwise properly qualified to offer a medical opinion B. holding beneficiaries under a will are qualified to testify to execution C. holding that an expert could testify that unguarded elevator buttons constituted a design defect despite the experts lack of a specific background in design and manufacture of elevators D. holding that njeither the plaintiff nor fellow crewmen are qualified to testify as design experts E. holding that generally qualified experts do not require a subspecialty in order to testify to things within their expertise

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that njeither the plaintiff nor fellow crewmen are qualified to testify as design experts
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: 8.3 from time to time , viber may offer products or features available at no charge for a trial period , at viber 's sole discretion , including as to duration and scope of no charge offers .

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: the Court considered the facts surrounding his attempted burglary conviction. In United States v. Telesco, 962 F.2d 165 (2d Cir.1992) the Second Circuit held that “[w]hen prior convictions are for crimes designated as ‘crimes of violence’ by the Sentencing Commission, the sentencing court is not permitted to examine the actual conduct underlying the convictions. The Sentencing Commission has thus determined that certain crimes — regardless of the precise conduct — are inherently violent.” Id. at 166. As stated above, it has already been decided that attempted burglary is a “violent felony.” See Andrello, 9 F.3d at 249. Thus, for purposes of determining career offender status under the Guidelines, there is no such thing as a non-violent attempted burglary. See Telesco, 962 F.2d at 166 (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Hathaway, 949 F.2d Options: A. holding that iowa burglary is not categorical burglary as the elements of iowa burglary law are broader than those of generic burglary B. holding that burglary is violent felony C. holding that virginia burglary statute comes within definition of generic burglary D. holding there is no such thing as a nonviolent burglary E. holding that possession of burglary tools is an offense separate from burglary

assistant: The best answer is D. holding there is no such thing as a nonviolent burglary
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you are responsible for ensuring that your host service is accurately represented in the verified images and you will stop using the verified images on or through the airbnb platform if they no longer accurately represent your listing , if you stop hosting the host service featured , or if your airbnb account is terminated or suspended for any reason .

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: the question is whether such a discount is legally allowed. Although Iowa law was clear at the time Sieg made its valuation that a minority discount is not permitted, we have never decided whether a discount applicable to all shares of a closely-held corporation is permissible. Security State Bank, 554 N.W.2d at 889. Other courts considering this issue have disagreed. See Rigel Corp. v. Cutchall, 245 Neb. 118, 511 N.W.2d 519, 525-26 (1994) (noting some jurisdictions allow marketability discounts and others do not, and listing cases); Fletcher § 5906.120, at 436-37 (discussing whether a marketability discount may be applied). Therefore, we cannot say Sieg had no legal basis for taking such a discount here. Cf. Wetherbee v. Economy Fire & Cas. Co., 508 N.W.2d 657, 662 (Iowa 1993) (<HOLDING>). We also note that Sieg’s use of a Options: A. holding that under montana common law an insurer cannot be held liable for bad faith in denying a claim if the insurer had a reasonable basis for contesting the claim B. holding that insured may recover attorneys fees from insurer where insurer acts in bad faith C. holding that the district of columbia is among the many jurisdictions that have recognized a cause of action in tort for the bad faith refusal of an insurer to pay D. holding that the plaintiffs could not be accused of bad faith when asserting a claim in an unsettled area of west virginia law E. holding insurer was not acting in bad faith in denying underinsured motorist benefits where denial was based on an issue of law unsettled in iowa and on which other jurisdictions disagreed

assistant: The best answer is E. holding insurer was not acting in bad faith in denying underinsured motorist benefits where denial was based on an issue of law unsettled in iowa and on which other jurisdictions disagreed
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that contained both exhausted and unexhausted claims. See Taylor, 134 F.3d at 986. The procedure included (1) allowing a petitioner to amend his petition to remove the unexhausted claims — as Rose indieat- ed; (2) staying and holding in abeyance the amended, fully exhausted petition to allow a petitioner the opportunity to proceed to state court to exhaust the deleted claims; and (3) permitting the petitioner after completing exhaustion to amend his petition once more to reinsert the newly exhausted claims back into the original petition. Id. While the court in Taylor expressed reservations about the three-step procedure, it concluded the district court did have discretion to stay an exhausted petition. Id. at, 988; see also Fetterly v. Paskett, 997 F.2d 1295, 1301 (9th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). This court later approved the three-step Options: A. holding seventh state petition for postconviction relief which was based on newly discovered evidence but rejected by the state courts because the evidence was not newly discovered was properly filed B. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence where the evidence would serve only to impeach testimony C. holding that it was an abuse of discretion for a district court not to stay an exhausted petition pending exhaustion of a newly discovered claim D. holding that a district court faced with a mixed petition should stay the unexhausted claims pending exhaustion rather than dismiss them without prejudice for the same purpose it is preferable to stay proceedings pending exhaustion E. holding that it was an abuse of discretion to deny stay while matter was pending in neighboring state

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it was an abuse of discretion for a district court not to stay an exhausted petition pending exhaustion of a newly discovered claim
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: Use the proceeds of any Extension of Credit for any purpose other than (i) refinancing the obligations of the Borrowers (other than MAIT) under the Existing Credit Agreement and (ii) working capital and other general corporate purposes of such Borrower and its Subsidiaries; provided, however, that such Borrower may not use such proceeds in connection with any Hostile Acquisition.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that Cigna knew or should have known that the claims were covered. Simply put, an insurer cannot know claims are covered when they are not. So, from the above recitation and the record before us, we see that both Killion and the court interjected into the case the issue of Killion’s statutory right to back surgery. And, as presented in the jury charge at least through question one, Cig-na’s liability to Killion was contingent upon the jury determining that he was entitled to treatment (ie. back surgery) under the Workers’ Compensation Act. This posed a problem, however, because the power to determine whether Kil-lion was entitled to compensation benefits in the form of back surgery lay solely with the TWCC, subject to judicial review. Sa 7 (Tex.Civ.App.—Amarillo 1976, writ refd n.r.e.) (<HOLDING>). That Killion may have to first incur the Options: A. holding that the parties choiceoflaw agreement as relating to workers compensation was appropriately avoided where it offended state public policy as reflected in express provisions of the pennsylvania workers compensation act B. holding that the provisions of the workers compensation act must be satisfied or the action is not maintainable in the courts C. holding that provisions of section 40115102 are applicable to the determination of the status of truck drivers as employees or independent contractors under the workers compensation act and discussing legislative history indicating intent to apply these provisions both to workers compensation and unemployment compensation matters D. holding that the exclusivity of workers compensation is an affirmative statutory defense which must be timely raised or it is waived E. holding that the trial courts authority to initiate workers compensation benefits before the final adjudication was not divested by the legislature and was consistent with the stated purpose of the workers compensation act

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the provisions of the workers compensation act must be satisfied or the action is not maintainable in the courts
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: such facts are alleged to appear, and other evidence thereof shall not be received.” § 2513(b). Any damage award to which plaintiff may be entitled is capped at “$50,000 for each 12-month period of incarceration.” § 2513(e). 3. Summary of the parties’ arguments Defendant seeks to dismiss plaintiffs complaint for lack of jurisdiction because plaintiff-has not provided a true certificate of innocence from the trial court as required by § 2513(b). Defendant cites to cases from the United States Court of Claims, the predecessor court to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, for the proposition that presentation of a certificate of innocence is a jurisdictional requirement under § 2513. .See Moore v. United States, 230 Ct.Cl. 819, 820, 1982 WL 25193 (1982) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); McMurry v. United States, 228 Ct.Cl. 897, Options: A. holding that a governments consent to be sued must be construed strictly in favor of the sovereign B. holding pcra time limits are jurisdictional in nature and must be strictly construed C. holding that railroad immunity act should be strictly construed D. holding 2513 to be jurisdictional and therefore must be strictly construed E. holding that a statute enacted in derogation of the common law must be strictly construed

assistant: The best answer is D. holding 2513 to be jurisdictional and therefore must be strictly construed
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: No fractional shares shall be issued upon conversion of this Note. Upon conversion of this Note in full, the Company shall be forever released from all its obligations and liabilities under this Note and this Note shall be deemed of no further force or effect, whether or not the original of this Note has been delivered to the Company for cancellation.

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

user: 3.1. In consideration of the Disclosing Party disclosing Confidential Information to the Receiving Party, the Receiving Party undertakes that it shall: a) keep the Confidential Information secret and confidential, using at least the same degree of care as its uses to protect its own confidential information but no less than a reasonable degree of care; 10.2. The rights and obligations contained in this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect for [two (2)] years after expiration of the Term or termination of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: neutral. Accordingly, the court must determine whether the defendants’ actions are narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and whether there are sufficient alternative channels of communication. 1. Narrowly Tailored to Serve a Significant Government Interest The determination of whether the Village’s restriction on Sandefur’s speech was narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest is a legal rather than a factual question. See Mesa v. White, 197 F.3d 1041, 1046 & n. 5 (10th Cir.1999); White House Vigil for the ERA Comm. v. Clark, 746 F.2d 1518, 1528-29 (D.C.Cir. 1984). It is thus appropriate for resolution on summary judgment when no material underlying facts are in dispute. See MacDonald v. City of Chicago, 243 F.3d 1021, 1034 (7th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). It is well-settled that a local government Options: A. holding that even in a public forum the government may impose reasonable restrictions on the time place or manner of protected speech provided the restrictions are justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech that they are narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest and that they leave open ample alternative channels for communication of the information B. holding 18 usca 922g8 passes constitutional muster because it is a reasonable restriction on the right to bear arms and is narrowly tailored to support a compelling government interest C. holding on summary judgment that a regulation is narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest D. holding that such classifications are permissible only when suitably tailored to serve a compelling state interest E. holding restrictions embodied in content neutral statute must be narrowly tailored to serve significant government interest while leaving open sufficient alternative channels of communication

assistant: The best answer is C. holding on summary judgment that a regulation is narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest
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: for the enforcement of child support, includ ing contempt, but not including income withholding. Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 157.167 (West 2008). Under section 157.167(a), if the trial court finds that a respondent to a motion for enforcement has failed to make child-support payments, the trial court must order the respondent to pay the mov-ant’s reasonable attorney’s fees and court costs as well as the child-support arrearag-es. See id. Without the requirement of any finding that these fees and costs are child support or necessaries for the benefit of the children, the trial court has the authority to enforce such an order by any means available for the enforcement of child support, but the trial court is not required to use these means of enforcement. See id.; Iliff, 339 S.W.3d at 81 (<HOLDING>); see also Isaacs v. Isaacs, 338 S.W.3d 184, Options: A. holding appellant waived his complaint that trial court gave him no notice of submission date for summaryjudgment motion by not raising the objection in the trial court B. holding that may as used in section 154066 gave the trial court authority or permission C. holding that although the court has the authority to review facts not before the plan administrator the court should use that authority sparingly D. holding that judge presiding at trial may not testify in that trial as witness E. holding appellant waived her complaint that trial court gave her no notice of summaryjudgment hearing by not raising the objection in the trial court

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that may as used in section 154066 gave the trial court authority or permission
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, 168 Md.App. 504, 521-22, 897 A.2d 296 (2006) (applying the factors to possession of child pornography); Samuels v. State, 54 Md.App. 486, 495, 459 A.2d 213 (1983) (applying the analysis to possession of stolen goods). In McDonald v. State, 141 Md.App. 371, 785 A.2d 836 (2001), we addressed the issue of constructive possession of a handgun. Quoting Price v. State, 111 Md.App. 487, 499, 681 A.2d 1206 (1996), we recognized that “ ‘the proximity between the defendant and the contraband and the fact that the contraband was within the view ... of t 90), cert. denied, 321 Md. 502, 583 A.2d 276 (1991), a case concerning the constructive possession of narcotics, is particularly analogous to the case sub judice. On appeal, Martin Coo Archie v. State, 161 Md.App. 226, 247, 867 A.2d 1120 (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 387 Md. 462, 875 A.2d 767 Options: A. holding that if the site where the contraband is found is in joint rather than exclusive possession a defendants knowledge of the contrabands presence and his ability to control it cannot be inferred merely from the defendants proximity to the contraband B. holding that officers had probable cause to arrest driver and two passengers where cocaine and contraband were found in glove compartment and backseat armrest of vehicle and none of the men offered any information regarding the ownership of the drugs and contraband on the ground that the drugs and contraband could have been in the possession of any one of the three vehicle occupants or all three of them jointly C. holding evidence was sufficient to support conviction for pfdcf where defendant was arrested immediately outside his residence and an unloaded handgun was found in the residence under the defendants bed and in the same room as the controlled substances and cash D. holding that circumstance that contraband was found in a box bearing defendants name was sufficient to support an inference of knowledge and dominion and control E. holding the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the defendant possessed contraband found in the kitchen of a residence where the defendant was found in the nearby bathroom attempting to dispose of contraband down the toilet

assistant: The best answer is E. holding the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the defendant possessed contraband found in the kitchen of a residence where the defendant was found in the nearby bathroom attempting to dispose of contraband down the toilet
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 indemnify a public employee for defense costs arising out of willful or wanton misconduct,” regardless of the context in which those defense costs arise. We disagree. The statutes from which the city derives its broad public policy are part of the OTCA. By its terms, the OTCA establishes when the state and its subdivisions must expend public funds to address tort claims. Through the amendment of ORS 30.285 and ORS 30.287 in 1975, the legislature expanded the OTCA to require the state and its subdivisions to take financial responsibility for tort claims filed against their employees. Indeed, the Supreme Court has explicitly held that ORS 30.287 is directed to “torts, [and] not to other claims.” City of Tualatin v. City-County Ins. Services Trust, 321 Or 164, 171, 894 P2d 1158 (1995) (<HOLDING>). That statute and ORS 30.285 were designed “to Options: A. holding that proof that an employer fired an employee three months after the employee filed a charge of discrimination sufficed to state a prima facie case of causation B. holding that ors 30287 does not oblige a municipality to defend an employee against an ethics charge C. holding that the other party must have adequate notice of the claim in order to defend against it D. holding that an insurers duty to defend arises from the allegations in the complaint against the insured E. holding that rule 52040 prohibited the state from amending the indictment to include a different charge because defendant was prejudiced in that he had no ability to defend himself against the added charge

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that ors 30287 does not oblige a municipality to defend an employee against an ethics charge
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall (a) by 08:00 a.m (New York City time) on the date hereof, issue a press release disclosing the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereby, and (b) file a Current Report on Form 8-K, including the Transaction Documents as exhibits thereto, with the Commission within the time required by the Exchange Act. From and after the issuance of such press release, the Company represents to the Purchasers that it shall have publicly disclosed all material, non-public information delivered to any of the Purchasers by the Company or any of its Subsidiaries, or any of their respective officers, directors, employees or agents in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. In addition, effective upon the issuance of such press release, the Company acknowledges and agrees that any and all confidentiality or similar obligations under any agreement, whether written or oral, between the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or any of their respective officers, directors, agents, employees or Affiliates on the one hand, and any of the Purchasers or any of their Affiliates on the other hand, shall terminate. The Company and each Purchaser shall consult with each other in issuing any other press releases with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby, and neither the Company nor any Purchaser shall issue any such press release nor otherwise make any such public statement without the prior consent of the Company, with respect to any press release of any Purchaser, or without the prior consent of each Purchaser, with respect to any press release of the Company, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed, except if such disclosure is required by law, in which case the disclosing party shall promptly provide the other party with prior notice of such public statement or communication. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company shall not publicly disclose the name of any Purchaser, or include the name of any Purchaser in any filing with the Commission or any regulatory agency or Trading Market, without the prior written consent of such Purchaser, except (a) as required by federal securities law in connection with the filing of final Transaction Documents with the Commission and (b) to the extent such disclosure is required by law or Trading Market regulations, in which case the Company shall provide the Purchasers with prior notice of such disclosure permitted under this clause (b).

assistant: Publicity