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: differences, which they might have had with one another, the titles which they then know nothing of and which were afterwards discovered, are not a cause of rescinding the transaction, unless they have been kept concealed on purpose by the deed of the parties. But the transaction becomes void, if it relates only to an object upon which it is provided by the titles newly discovered, that one of the parties has no right at all. 24 . Hicks v. Fidelity-Southern Fire Ins. Co., 251 So.2d 526 (La.App. 1st Cir.1971) (finding plaintiff's claim that he was unaware of full extent of loss at time signed release insufficient to invalidate general release of all claims arising out of particular event. Hurricane Betsy); Jurado v. State Farm Mutual Ins. Co., 557 So.2d 266, 268 (La.App. 4th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); see also Ingram, 698 F.2d at 1322 (noting Options: A. holding purposely inflicts serious injury and intended to cause serious injury convey the same specific intent such that it is impossible to commit one without the other B. holding a plaintiff cannot avoid exhaustion simply because he or she asks for damages C. holding that decision cannot be ignored simply because review is being sought D. holding that release cannot be rescinded simply because plaintiff later learns she had a more serious injury E. holding that it was a double jeopardy violation to convict and sentence for both dui with serious bodily injury and driving without a valid license with serious bodily injury based on an injury to a single victim

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that release cannot be rescinded simply because plaintiff later learns she had a more serious injury
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: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, up to an aggregate of $27,214,705 of Shares. Each Purchaser shall deliver to the Company, via wire transfer, immediately available funds equal to such Purchaser’s Subscription Amount as set forth on the signature page hereto executed by such Purchaser and the Company shall deliver to each Purchaser its respective Shares as determined pursuant to Section 2.2(a), and the Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of Lowenstein Sandler LLP, 1251 Avenue of the Americas, New York 10020 or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree.

assistant: Closings
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: Interest accrued hereunder shall be payable as set forth in Section 2.1(c) hereof. Except as otherwise set forth herein, all interest and fees shall be calculated on the basis of a year consisting of 360 days and shall be paid for the actual number of days elapsed. Principal payments submitted in funds not immediately available shall continue to bear interest until collected. If any payment to be made by Borrowers hereunder or under the Revolving Note shall become due on a day other than a Business Day, such payment shall be made on the next succeeding Business Day and such extension of time shall be included in computing any interest in respect of such payment. Any Obligations which are not paid when due (subject to applicable grace periods) shall bear interest at the Default Rate.

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: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Subject to the provisions of Section 2.06(b) , each Loan shall bear interest on the outstanding principal amount thereof at a rate per annum equal to the Applicable Rate; provided that the accrued interest shall be paid in kind and added quarterly on each Interest Payment Date to the outstanding principal amount of the applicable Loan.

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: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Rescission Agreement represents the entire agreement between the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements or undertakings between the Parties to such matters. This Rescission Agreement alone fully and completely expresses the agreement of the Parties relating to the subject matter hereof. There are no other courses of dealing, understanding, agreements, representations or warranties, written or oral, except as set forth herein. This Rescission Agreement may not be amended, canceled, revoked or otherwise modified except by written agreement executed by all of the Parties hereto.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Whenever in this Agreement a Covered Person is permitted or required to make a decision (including a decision that is in such Covered Person’s “discretion” or under a grant of similar authority or latitude), the Covered Person shall be entitled to consider only such interests and factors as such Covered Person desires, including its own interests, and shall have no duty or obligation to give any consideration to any interest of or factors affecting the Company or any other Person. Whenever in this Agreement a Covered Person is permitted or required to make a decision in such Covered Person’s “good faith” or under another express standard, the Covered Person shall act under such express standard and shall not be subject to any other or different standard imposed by this Agreement or any other Applicable Law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Agreement by facsimile or scanned pages shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart to this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by denying his motion to dismiss the indictment for failure to allege certain elements of the crime. We review the sufficiency of an indictment de novo. United States v. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, 364 F.3d 1142, 1145 (9th Cir.2004). Bello-Bahena asserts that the district court should have dismissed the indictment because it failed to allege (1) voluntary entry, (2) inspection and admission by an immigration officer or actual and intentional evasion of inspection, and (3) knowledge of presence in the United States. However, each of these claims is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Rivera-Sillas, 376 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir.2004) (“That clause [§ 1326] does not require the indictment to specifically state that the defendant alien voluntarily entered the United States.”); id. at 892 (<HOLDING>); id. at 893 (holding that an indictment under Options: A. holding that an indictment gave sufficient notice when the indictment charged the elements of the offense B. recognizing difference in elements between offense of actual entry and attempted entry C. holding that a found in indictment need not allege all of the elements of entry D. holding that elements of statute which became 924e need not be reflected in indictment for crime charged E. holding that an indictment charging one offense during the commission of another crime need not allege the elements of the latter offense

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a found in indictment need not allege all of the elements of entry
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: me upon which I could justify such a decision. And all of you, you, the jury and my staff and the police departments and their experts did what we did because it’s our responsibility and duty. Tr. at 2350. Mr. Fox misconstrues Caldwell. In that case, the court held that the prosecutor could not suggest to the jury that it was not the final arbiter of the defendant’s fate, given that there was an appeals process in which their determination was reviewable. See Caldwell, 472 U.S. at 328-329, 105 S.Ct. 2633. In this case, the prosecutor told the jury that he did not undertake the decision to seek the death penalty lightly, and pointed to the different elements that went into making his decision. This is a permissible line of commentary. See Moore v. Gibson, 195 F.3d 1152 (10th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); see also Sellers v. Ward, 135 F.3d 1333, 1343 Options: A. holding that it was not a violation of caldwell for the prosecutor to note a number of things have to happen before a death sentence is sought B. holding that the caldwell claim is procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal but was not C. holding that a defendant must have notice that the trial court might sentence him to death D. holding that a caldwell claim is procedurally barred if it is not raised on direct appeal E. holding that the term of imprisonment for purposes of application note 5 is the sentence imposed by the state court and that it shall not be decreased to reflect a suspension of any part of the sentence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that it was not a violation of caldwell for the prosecutor to note a number of things have to happen before a death sentence is sought
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 customs violations. These officials did not need ‘to have particularized suspicions about any person or place before searching, nor were they required to justify their actions to any authority after the search.’ The Framers found these unchecked governmental actions by the British unacceptable. To ensure that their new government would not have this type of arbitrary power, and to protect against the recurrence of these unchecked governmental actions, the Framers included the Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights, granting the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.” See Denise Robinson, Kaupp v. Texas: Breathing Life into the Fourth Amendment, 94 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 761 (Spring 2004). This protection was, 2 S.Ct. 587, 592, 151 L.Ed.2d 497, 506-507 (2001) (<HOLDING>). In still others, the Court has dispensed with Options: A. holding that an officer can stop an individual if the officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal activity is underfoot B. holding unanimously that a warrantless search of a probationers apartment that was supported by reasonable suspicion and authorized as a condition of his probation was reasonable within the meaning of the fourth amendment C. recognizing that an officer must have a reasonable articulable suspicion that the person has been is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity to frisk an individual for weapons and must have probable cause to conduct a further seizure D. holding that an officer has reasonable suspicion to conduct traffic stop even when his suspicion that a law has been violated is based on a reasonable mistake of law E. holding that when an officer has reasonable suspicion that a probationer who is already subject to a search condition pursuant to his probation agreement is engaged in criminal activity then there is enough likelihood that criminal conduct is occurring that an intrusion on the probationers privacy interests is reasonable

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that when an officer has reasonable suspicion that a probationer who is already subject to a search condition pursuant to his probation agreement is engaged in criminal activity then there is enough likelihood that criminal conduct is occurring that an intrusion on the probationers privacy interests is reasonable
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: upon termination by truecaller without cause , you will be refunded any unused prepaid fees upon your written request , provided a receipt of such fees and a clear payment instruction are included in your request .

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: owed to a governmental unit. 341 B.R. at 50. However, that bare restatement of the rule in § 1322(a)(4) does not help determine the meaning of “owed directly to or recoverable by a governmental unit.” In fact that was not even the question presented in Sanders. Rather the question in that case was whether § 1322(a)(2) required priority claims to be paid in the order specified in § 507, so that a domestic support obligation under § 507(a)(1) would be paid in full before administrative expenses under § 507(a)(2). Id. at 49-50. The bankruptcy court held that it did not. Id. at 50 aff'd, Alabama Dep’t of Human Res. v. Sanders (In re Sanders), 347 B.R. 776 (N.D.Ala.2006). See also In re Lanigan, 101 B.R. 530, 532 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.1986) (citing In re Parker, 21 B.R. 692, 694 (E.D.Tenn.1982)) (<HOLDING>). Thus, Sanders does not illuminate the Options: A. holding that a chapter 13 debtor should be able to obtain a copy of his transcript in light of the broader discharge provision of chapter 13 B. holding that a plan under chapter 13 although confirmed was invalid because it failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of 11 usc 1322a2 requiring full payment of all claims entitled to priority C. holding that priority claims can be paid concurrently with other creditors over the life of a chapter 13 plan D. holding that child support arrearages may not be included in a chapter 13 plan E. holding that a creditors failure to vote or to object to a chapter 11 plan constitutes acceptance of the plan

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that priority claims can be paid concurrently with other creditors over the life of a chapter 13 plan
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: offense, and the defendant has at least two prior felony convictions for crimes of violence or controlled substance offenses. Defendant argues that the Career Offend er Guideline should not have been applied to him, because the instant offense was not a crime of violence. We review de novo the district court’s interpretation and application of the Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Nielsen, 371 F.3d 574, 582 (9th Cir.2004). Defendant is correct with respect to the counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). “‘Crime of violence’ does not include the offense of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon.... ” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 cmt. n. 1; see also Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36, 45-47, 113 S.Ct. 1913, 123 L.Ed.2d 598 (1993) (<HOLDING>). However, Defendant is incorrect with respect Options: A. holding that commentary in the guidelines manual that interprets or explains a guideline is authoritative unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or is inconsistent with or a plainly erroneous reading of that guideline B. holding a sentence is not based on the guidelines unless the plea agreement itself expressly uses a guidelines sentencing range to establish the term of imprisonment C. recognizing the guidelines commentary is authoritative D. holding that commentary in sentencing guidelines that interprets or explains a guideline is authoritative unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the guideline it interprets E. holding that sentencing guidelines commentary must be given controlling weight unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or is plainly inconsistent with the guidelines itself

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that sentencing guidelines commentary must be given controlling weight unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or is plainly inconsistent with the guidelines itself
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 claim in constitutional terms will not immunize it from dismissal pursuant to the exhaustion requirement. The D.C. Circuit has held that “when an alleged constitutional violation ‘is intertwined with a statutory one, and [the legislature] has provided the machinery for the resolution of the latter,’ the plaintiff must exhaust [her] administrative remedies before a district court may hear [her] case.” King, 961 F.2d at 243. Here, because the statutory and constitutional claims are “premised on the same facts” and “the administrative process [is] fully capable of granting full relief,” exhaustion is required. Id. (citing Andrade v. Lauer, 729 F.2d 1475, 1493 (D.C.Cir.1984)); see also Marine Mammal Conservancy, Inc. v. Department of Agriculture, 134 F.3d 409, 413-14 (D.C.Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). The plaintiffs’ due process claims are Options: A. holding that there would be no exception to american rule on attorney fees for legal malpractice claims B. holding that rumors are nondiscriminatory due to the very nature of such gossip C. holding that the plaintiff would be very much mistaken in believing that there is some brightline rule allowing litigants to bypass administrative processes simply because one or all of their claims are constitutional in nature D. recognizing that without claim preclusion plaintiffs in small claims cases will not feel obligated to present all of their claims or all of their evidence and they can simply file again if need be E. recognizing that impleader under rule 14a is available only against persons who are or may be liable to defendant for part or all of plaintiffs claim it cannot be used as a way of combining all controversies having a common relationship in one action

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the plaintiff would be very much mistaken in believing that there is some brightline rule allowing litigants to bypass administrative processes simply because one or all of their claims are constitutional in nature
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: At the request of the Company following the Separation Date and subject to Section 14 below, Employee will cooperate with the Company, with nVent Electric plc and with any affiliate of nVent Electric plc in any claims or lawsuits where Employee has knowledge of the facts. Nothing in this Agreement prevents Employee from testifying at an administrative hearing, arbitration, deposition or in court in response to a lawful and properly served subpoena (provided Employee provides written notice of the service of the subpoena to the Company within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt), nor does it preclude Employee from filing an administrative charge with a government agency or cooperating with a government agency in connection with an administrative charge (though he may not recover damages or receive any relief from the Company if he does file such a charge as noted in Section 2 above). Employee certifies, warrants and represents that he is unaware of any actual or potential violations of law by the Company, nVent Electric plc or any affiliate of nVent Electric plc.

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: Administrative Agent shall have received evidence of the insurance and additional insured, lender loss payee and other endorsements required hereunder and under the other Loan Documents, and certificates of such insurance policies and/or endorsements naming Administrative Agent, all in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to Administrative Agent.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notices required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served on, or delivered to, any Party to this Agreement, shall be in writing and shall be signed by the Party giving or delivering it and sent by courier that guarantees overnight delivery, or by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the Party to whom any communication under this Agreement is to be made. Notice given as provided herein shall be deemed to have been given on the mailing date and, unless otherwise provided herein, shall be effective from that date. Notice shall be sent to the respective Party at the address set forth below. Any Party may change its address for purposes of receiving notices by furnishing notice of such change in the manner set forth above.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Unless specifically provided herein, this Agreement contains all of the understandings and representations between Employer and Employee relating to the subject matter hereofand supersedes all prior and contemporaneous understandings, discussions, agreements, representations and warranties, both written and oral, regarding such subject matter.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: arrest or other detention.” 18 U.S.C. § 3501(c). It is worth noting here that in Dickerson, 530 U.S. 428, 120 S.Ct. 2326, the Supreme Court reversed the Fourth Circuit and held that § 3501 declined to overrule Miranda on the grounds that “Miranda announced a constitutional rule that Congress may not supersede legislatively.” Id. at 444, 86 S.Ct. 1602. 24 . See United States v. Alvarez-Sanchez, 511 U.S. 350, 355-56, 114 S.Ct. 1599, 128 L.Ed.2d 319 (1994) (recognizing the conflict between § 3501 and McNabb-Mallory, but stating that the Ninth Circuit has "concluded that the McNabb-Mallory rule, in either a pure or slightly modified form, applies to confessions made after the expiration of the safe harbor period” set out in § 3501); United States v. Pugh, 25 F.3d 669, 675 (8th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Christopher, 956 F.2d 536, Options: A. holding that 3501 overruled mcnabbmallory B. holding that lynch has been effectively overruled by subsequent cases C. holding that koon overruled prior circuit law to the contrary D. holding that schlitz was overruled to that extent E. holding that almendareztorres was not overruled by apprendi

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 3501 overruled mcnabbmallory
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: While the prior language mandated the two-level enhancement for an “express threat of death,” the amended guideline softened this standard by removing the requirement that threats be “express.” Compare U.S.S.G. § 2B3.1(b)(2)(F) (2003) with U.S.S.G. § 2B3.1(b)(2)(F) (1995). In addition, the Sentencing Commission amended the commentary to change the requirement that a threat instill “significantly greater fear than that necessary to constitute an element of the offense of robbery” to a requirement that the threat instill “a fear of death.” See U.S.S.G. app. C, amend. 552 (2005). According to the Guidelines Manual, the text was amended to address the circuit conflict discussed in France. See id. The Sentencing Commission adopted the majority view, which applied 79 (5th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Winbush, 296 F.3d 442, 443 Options: A. holding that the statement i have a gun would cause a reasonable teller to fear being shot and that the phrase i am willing to use it would make a fear of death even more likely B. holding that a demand note that read you have ten seconds to hand me all the money in your top drawer i have a gun warranted the twolevel enhancement because a reasonable teller would interpret the statement to mean if i do not give this robber money within ten seconds i will be shot and people who are shot often die C. holding that a note stating i have a gun i have nothing to lose warrants the threatofdeath enhancement because a reasonable teller would have been in fear for her life D. holding that i have a gun is sufficient to justify the sentencing enhancement because it merely requires a teller to make the reasonable inference that a robber would use the gun he claimed to have if he did not receive the money he demanded E. holding that i have a gun merits an enhancement because a reasonable teller would believe that failure to comply would result in being fatally shot

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that i have a gun is sufficient to justify the sentencing enhancement because it merely requires a teller to make the reasonable inference that a robber would use the gun he claimed to have if he did not receive the money he demanded
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: Other than the specific representations and warranties expressly set forth in this Article 3, Seller specifically disclaims and does not make any other express or implied representation or warranty, at law or in equity, with respect to the Interests or the Transactions.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: closing arguments of both the State and the defendant (see Cloutier, 156 Ill. 2d at 507; Kitchen, 159 Ill. 2d at 38). In closing argument, defense counsel reminded the jury that Dornbos was the lead investigator in this case, and that Dornbos had interrogated Rinaldi. Defense counsel then suggested that the jury consider why, if Dornbos had not made promises or threats to Rinaldi upon Rinaldi’s arrest, as Rinaldi had originally testified at the suppression hearing, the prosecution had not called Dornbos to testify to that fact. In response to defense counsel’s argument, the prosecutor pointed out on rebuttal that defendant could have called Dornbos as a witness. In so responding, the prosecutor did not shift the burden of proof to defendant. See People v. Redd, 173 Ill. 2d 1, 31 (1996) (<HOLDING>); People v. Brown, 172 Ill. 2d 1, 42 (1996) Options: A. holding that the failure of a witness to appear in response to a subpoena was an indirect contempt since the court did not witness all of the essential elements of the misconduct B. holding that the burden of proof was not shifted when the prosecutor in closing argument referred to the defendants right to subpoena each and every witness he may want to and put anybody at all on the witness stand C. holding that promises made by the prosecution to a witness in exchange for that witness testimony relate directly to the credibility of the witness D. holding that the defendants due process rights were violated when the trial judge singled out the only defense witness and indicated to that witness that he expected the witness to he and would personally ensure that the witness was prosecuted for perjury and thereby effectively drove that witness off the stand E. holding that error is preserved regarding a defendants right to confront a witness if the defendant identifies for the trial court the subject matter about which he or she desired to examine the witness and the subject had a tendency to affect the witness credibility

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the burden of proof was not shifted when the prosecutor in closing argument referred to the defendants right to subpoena each and every witness he may want to and put anybody at all on the witness stand
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: negligence to project’s construction workers). The record lacks evidence that Oncor engaged in any negligent activity contemporaneous with Murillo’s injury at the job-site, or controlled the details of Murillo’s work, or had a hand in salvaging cable, or authorized entry into the transformers it operated within its electrical easement, or represented to anyone the status of its transformer as de-energized. Without such evidence, Oncor’s duty was, at most, that of an occupier of the premises. As a premises defendant, Oncor was entitled to standard jury instructions that would have defined the scope of Oncor’s duty to Murillo in light of the warnings to those who came near its energized transformers and the efforts Oncor made to keep its premises safe. See Brooks, 336 S.W.2d at 603 (<HOLDING>); compare Tex. Dep’t of Transp. v. Ramming, 861 Options: A. holding that where electricity supplier had its employees on construction site from time to time in connection with supplying temporary electricity any knowledge suppliers employees had of building construction was incidental to supplying electricity thus construction worker who was injured when he contacted live highvoltage electrical transmission lines wholly failed to establish any reason why electricity supplier should have foreseen injury and no duty arises to act to prevent such unanticipated injury B. holding that electrical supplier owed no duty in general negligence to construction worker injured by contact with live highvoltage electrical transmission lines on construction site C. holding that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment to the contractor where genuine issues of material fact existed regarding a duty to an injured construction worker D. holding that an employer through its employees did not breach an independent duty to power company not to come in contact with power companys transmission lines because such a duty is a general duty not an independent one E. holding costs of providing power during construction delay were direct damages because contract provision specified that owner would provide electricity to construction site

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that electrical supplier owed no duty in general negligence to construction worker injured by contact with live highvoltage electrical transmission lines on construction site
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: address an argument despite its abandonment on appeal, we ordinarily will not do so ‘unless manifest injustice otherwise would result.’ ” (quoting Anderson v. Branen, 27 F.3d 29, 30 (2d Cir.1994))). Here, no “manifest injustice” results from the denial of Turma-laj’s petition, as the relevant regulation provides that “[a] motion to reopen proceedings for the purpose of submitting an application for relief must be accompanied by the appropriate application for relief and all supporting documentation.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1). As the plain language of the regulation provides, failure to comply with the requirement is a ground for denial of the motion. See Zhen Nan Lin v. Dep’t of Justice, 459 F.3d 255, 262 (2d Cir.2006); see also Lin Xing Jiang v. Holder, 639 F.3d 751, 757 (7th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). Because no manifest injustice results, and Options: A. holding that bia abused its discretion in denying motion to reopen B. holding it was not an abuse of discretion to deny funds C. holding that the bia abused its discretion when it denied petitioners motion to reopen by failing to consider evidence of country conditions D. holding that it was within the discretion of the bia to deny a motion to reopen because it was not accompanied by an asylum application E. holding that the bia abused its discretion in denying a motion to reopen when it failed to consider the argument before it

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that it was within the discretion of the bia to deny a motion to reopen because it was not accompanied by an asylum application
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 Third Circuit has not addressed derivative standing in Chapter 7 cases, “other courts have permitted individual creditors to bring derivative avoidance actions where the Trustee declined to do so.” In re Mou San Rim, Civ. No. 10-1066(DMC), 2010 WL 4615174, at *2, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117458, at *6 (D.N.J. Nov. 3, 2010) (citing Hyundai Translead, Inc. v. Jackson Truck & Trailer Repair, Inc. (In re Trailer Source), 555 F.3d 231, 243-44 (6th Cir.2009) (finding that “there is no textual support in the Code for drawing such a distinction between Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 contexts” and that “there are substantial policy reasons for allowing derivative standing in Chapter 7 proceedings”); PW Enters., Inc. v. N.D. Racing Comm’n (In re Racing Servs., Inc.), 540 F.3d 892, 898 (8th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>); In re Sandenhill, Inc., 304 B.R. 692, 694 Options: A. holding that derivative standing is available to a creditor to pursue avoidance actions when it shows that a chapter 7 trustee is unable or unwilling to do so B. holding in a case where a chapter 11 trustee was appointed after a period during which the debt or had operated as debtor in possession that a chapter 11 trustee has two years from the date of his appointment not from the commencement of the chapter 11 case to bring avoidance actions C. holding that there is no statutory authority in chapter 13 which grants a chapter 13 debtor independent standing to sue under the trustees avoidance power D. holding that chapter 13 debtors have standing to bring avoidance actions by reasoning that chapter 13 trustee has standing but little incentive to bring avoidance actions that will result in benefit to debtors of recovering exempt assets E. holding that because 544b1 provides only the power of avoidance it does not confer authority on the trustee to pursue state law damage claims but that the trustee could pursue such claims under 544a1 or 2 if the claims could have been asserted by the debtor corporation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that derivative standing is available to a creditor to pursue avoidance actions when it shows that a chapter 7 trustee is unable or unwilling to do so
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As a condition of receiving any and all amounts payable and benefits or additional rights provided pursuant to this Agreement beyond the Accrued Benefits, the Executive must execute and deliver to the Company and not revoke a general release of claims in favor of the Company in substantially the form attached on Exhibit B hereto (the “ Release ”). The Release must be executed and delivered (and no longer subject to revocation, if applicable) within sixty (60) days following the Executive’s Date of Termination. The Company shall deliver to the Executive the Release for the Executive to execute within five (5) business days following the Date of Termination.

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: applies where the plaintiff complains of retaliatory conduct violative of § 215(a)(3). Our Court of Appeals has not addressed this issue. Only two courts of appeals have definitively answered whether punitive damages are available under the FLSA. They reached contrary results. See Travis v. Gary Comty. Mental Health Ctr., Inc., 921 F.2d 108 (7th Cir.1990) (finding punitive damages are available for a retaliation claim under the FLSA); but see Snapp v. Unlimited Concepts, Inc., 208 F.3d 928 (11th Cir.2000) (finding punitive damages are not available for a retaliation claim under the FLSA). One court in this District found that punitive damages are available for a retaliation claim under the FLSA. See Marrow v. Allstate Sec. & Investigative Servs., Inc., 167 F.Supp.2d 838 (E.D.Pa.2001) (<HOLDING>). In Travis, the Court of Appeals for the Options: A. holding punitive damages not recoverable for retaliatory discharge claim under general maritime law B. holding that punitive damages are recoverable in a claim for retaliation under the flsa C. holding that punitive damages are not allowed under the flsa D. holding under flsa E. holding punitive damages available for retaliatory claim under flsa

assistant: The best answer is E. holding punitive damages available for retaliatory claim under flsa
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 justify general jurisdiction over the parent based on the presence of the subsidiary, the party moving the court to assert jurisdiction must demonstrate that the subsidiary is an “alter ego” of the parent. Id., at 218. To establish that a subsidiary is the alter ego of the parent, the party seeking jurisdiction must show that “[t]he degree of control exer cised by the parent must be greater than that normally associated with common ownership and directorship.” Id., at 219 (quoting Hargrave v. Fibreboard Corp., 710 F.2d 1154, 1160 (5th Cir.1983)). Even “100% stock ownership and commonality of officers and directors are not alone sufficient to establish an alter ego relationship between two corporations.” Id.; see also Gardemal v. Westin Hotel Co., 186 F.3d 588, 593 (5th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). In order to find an alter ego relationship, Options: A. holding that a parent corporations contacts may not be imputed to its subsidiary B. holding that parent is liable for acts of subsidiary under agency theory only if parent dominates subsidiary parent of whollyowned subsidiary that had seats on board took part in financing and approved major policy decisions was not liable because parent did not have daytoday control C. holding that a close relationship between a parent corporation and a subsidiary may justify finding that the parent engages in business in the jurisdiction through the local activities of its subsidiary D. holding that a parents ownership of subsidiary and facts that the same people served as directors of both companies and that a parent was involved in macromanagement and finances of subsidiary did not satisfy first prong of alter ego test and thus the court did not need to reach second prong dealing with equities E. holding that a subsidiary is not an alter ego of its parent even when the corporations are closely tied through stock ownership shared officers financing arrangements and the like

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a subsidiary is not an alter ego of its parent even when the corporations are closely tied through stock ownership shared officers financing arrangements and the like
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 TRADEMARK SECURITY AGREEMENT AND ANY CLAIM, CONTROVERSY, DISPUTE OR CAUSE OF ACTION (WHETHER IN CONTRACT OR TORT OR OTHERWISE) BASED UPON, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS TRADEMARK SECURITY AGREEMENT AND THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in a separate and clear finding,” id. at 95, 113 S.Ct. at 1117, the court may nevertheless make the upward adjustment whenever it finds all three elements of perjury. Here, the district court found that Queen’s testimony was “false” and that Queen gave this false testimony, “knowing it to be false and material.” That, we conclude, is sufficient. Accordingly, we affirm Queen’s conviction and sentence. AFFIRMED. 1 . We have found over 60 published opinions since 1990 addressing the rule. 2 . Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) provi efendant's previous sexual advances towards women admissible to show motive in fraudulent scheme to use company funds for personal relationships); United States v. Ford, 88 F.3d 1350, 1362 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 496, 136 L.Ed.2d 388 (1996) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Hayden, 85 F.3d 153, 159 Options: A. holding that evidence that defendants had participated in several prior drug transactions was properly admitted to establish defendants intent to distribute narcotics B. holding that a prior conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine is admissible under rule 609 C. holding that prior drug trafficking conviction was admissible to prove intent to distribute D. holding prior arrest in connection with an undercover drug buy admissible to show intent to distribute narcotics E. holding that evidence of a 10yearold drug conviction was properly admitted to show intent in a prosecution for possession with intent to distribute

assistant: The best answer is D. holding prior arrest in connection with an undercover drug buy admissible to show intent to distribute narcotics
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 agent, broker, investment banker, financial advisor or other Person is or shall be entitled, as a result of any action, agreement or commitment of the Company, to any broker’s, finder’s, financial advisor’s or other similar fee or commission in connection with any of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: R.App. P. 28(j), cite Savage v. Gee, 665 F.3d 732 (6th Cir.2012), in which we applied Garcetti and affirmed the grant of summary judgment against the plaintiff, a former state-university librarian who claimed that he was constructively discharged in retaliation for his First Amendment speech. Observing that the plaintiffs speech commenting on a book recommendation was not related to classroom instruction and “only loosely, if at all, related to academic scholarship,” this court held that his speech was pursuant to his duties as head librarian and as a committee member selecting books for freshman students, and thus not protected under the First Amendment. Id. at 739. Savage relied on cases including Evans-Marshall v. Board of Education of Tipp City, 624 F.3d 332, 342-44 (6th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). B. Decisions of other Circuits applying Options: A. holding that the district was not liable under respondeat superior for a teachers sexual assault of a student even though it occurred on school grounds and during school hours because the criminal misconduct was not within the scope of the teachers employment B. holding that school officials may not limit the first amendment rights of students and teachers to freedom of speech and expression C. holding that the first amendment does not protect primary and secondary school teachers inclass curricular speech even to the extent academic freedom as a constitutional rule could somehow apply to primary and secondary schools that does not insulate a teachers curricular and pedagogical choices from the school boards oversight as opposed to the teachers right to speak and write publicly about academic issues outside of the classroom D. holding that a collective bargaining agreement between school board and teachers union established a teachers legitimate claim of entitlement to their positions at elementary school E. holding the school did not violate the teachers constitutional rights by prohibiting the teacher from reading the bible in class

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the first amendment does not protect primary and secondary school teachers inclass curricular speech even to the extent academic freedom as a constitutional rule could somehow apply to primary and secondary schools that does not insulate a teachers curricular and pedagogical choices from the school boards oversight as opposed to the teachers right to speak and write publicly about academic issues outside of the classroom