flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, in addition to the Revolving Credit Loans provided for in Section 2.01(a), the Company may request the issuance of Letters of Credit for its own account by an Issuing Lender, in a form reasonably acceptable to such Issuing Lender, at any time and from time to time during the Revolving Credit Availability Period on any date falling more than five Business Days prior to the Revolving Credit Termination Date. Letters of Credit issued hereunder shall constitute utilization of the Revolving Credit Commitments. In the event of any inconsistency between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the terms and conditions of any form of letter of credit application or other agreement submitted by the Company to, or entered into by the Company with, an Issuing Lender relating to any Letter of Credit, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control.

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: more stringent regulations, only if the state law is (1) “necessary to eliminate or reduce an essentially local safety hazard,” (2) is not “incompatible” with any federal laws, and (3) “does not unreasonably burden interstate commerce.” Id. Although the express preemption clause in the FRSA speaks in terms of preemption of state law, and the plaintiffs action here is brought pursuant to FELA, a federal law, at least one court has held that in reconciling the two federal statutes, “the FRSA will supersede the FELA based on the policy embodied in the FRSA to ensure uniformity in law relating to railway safety.” Rice v. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Pacific Ry. Co., 955 F.Supp. at 740 (citing 49 U.S.C. § 20106); accord Waymire v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co., 218 F.3d 773, 776-777 (7th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); Thirkill v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., 950 Options: A. holding that in order to uphold the frsas goal of uniformity the frsa supercedes fela where the trains speed and warning devices complied with the frsa B. holding that the commission may not order reparations where a carrier complied with the commissions earlier order declaring its rate to be reasonable C. holding that officers observations of the speed of the truck coupled with the sound of the engine racing and the bouncing of the truck as it passed through the intersection gave officer probable cause to believe that truck was exceeding a speed greater than was reasonable and prudent under the conditions D. holding that the federal standard requiring the verdict to be against the clear weight of the evidence governs in a fela case E. holding that the cause of action under fela vests in the personal representative of the estate not in the beneficiaries

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that in order to uphold the frsas goal of uniformity the frsa supercedes fela where the trains speed and warning devices complied with the frsa
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The execution, delivery and performance by such Loan Party of this Amendment and all documents, instruments and agreements contemplated herein are within such Loan Party limited liability company or corporate powers and have been duly authorized by all necessary limited liability company or corporate action. This Amendment and any other document contemplated hereby to which such Loan Party is party has been duly executed and delivered by its and constitutes its legal, valid and binding obligation, enforceable in accordance with its terms, subject to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other laws affecting creditors’ rights generally and subject to general principles of equity, regardless of whether considered in a proceeding in equity or at law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was crying when she arrived, it appears, at least for some time prior to her arrival, Medrano had stopped crying. For all these reasons, we conclude that Medrano was not under the “extreme and continuing stress” of the battery at the time of Officer Stuffs arrival; therefore, her statements to Officer Stuff were not admissible as excited utterances. D. The State’s Claim of Harmless Error The State then claims that, even if Medrano’s statements to Officer Stuff were improperly admitted as excited utterances, the testimony was cumulative and the error was harmless. This argument fails in the first instance. Officer Stuffs testimony at trial was not cumulative; rather, it was the only testimony that supported the State’s strangulation charge against Young. See Turner, 958 N.E.2d at 1059 (<HOLDING>). It is axiomatic that improper admission of Options: A. holding that error is harmless if there is substantial independent evidence of guilt satisfying the reviewing court there is no substantial likelihood the challenged evidence contributed to the conviction B. holding that harmless error test is satisfied when there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction C. holding that an error is harmless if there is no reasonable possibility that it contributed to the conviction D. holding that under the harmless error standard an appellate court must determine whether there is a reasonable possibility that the error complained of might have contributed to the conviction E. holding that error is considered harmless if it is established beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict or alternatively stated that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that error is harmless if there is substantial independent evidence of guilt satisfying the reviewing court there is no substantial likelihood the challenged evidence contributed to the conviction
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: Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly serves the purposes of pleading negligent misrepresentation as well as would rule 9(b). Indeed, the Twombly rule is better, because there is nothing served by creating a new exception to Twombly’s general rule for a negligence tort unless there is some compelling reason to do so. Not finding that compelling reason, the Court will decline to apply rule 9(b) to negligent misrepresentation claims, particularly those like New Mexico’s and Colorado’s, which are truly based on negligent conduct. LAW REGARDING GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY A foreign jurisdiction is not compelled to follow the governmental immunity laws that protect a state-governmental entity in its own state. See Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Hyatt, 538 U.S. 488, 123 S.Ct. 1683, 155 L.Ed.2d 702 (2003)(<HOLDING>); Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410, 424, 99 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that a forum is not required to extend sovereign immunity to other states sued in its courts but should extend immunity under the principle of comity unless doing so would violate the forums public policies B. holding that rfras waiver of sovereign immunity did not extend to monetary damages the acts reference to appropriate relief was susceptible to more than one interpretation and thus was not an unambiguous waiver of sovereign immunity C. holding that the full faith and credit clause does not require a forum to apply the sovereign immunity doctrine of another state if such an application would violate the forums legitimate public policies D. holding that as a general rule interlocutory trial court orders rejecting defenses of common law sovereign immunity governmental immunity public official immunity statutory immunity or any other type of immunity are not appealable under the maryland collateral order doctrine E. holding that the tucker acts waiver of sovereign immunity for contract claims does not extend to claims for contracts implied in law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a forum is not required to extend sovereign immunity to other states sued in its courts but should extend immunity under the principle of comity unless doing so would violate the forums public policies
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, each Obligor waives and agrees not to assert any rights or privileges which it may acquire under the UCC, except to the extent arising solely from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Collateral Agent; provided, however, that the Obligors do not waive any rights or privileges to notice or the opportunity to cure otherwise provided under the Loan Documents. Each Obligor shall remain liable for any deficiency if the proceeds of any sale or other disposition of the Collateral are insufficient to pay its Obligations and the fees and disbursements of any attorneys employed by the Collateral Agent or any Guaranteed Creditor to collect such deficiency. The officers, directors and managers, as applicable, of the Obligors shall in no event be personally liable for any such deficiency.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In case any provision in this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable in a jurisdiction, such provision shall be modified or deleted, as to the jurisdiction involved, only to the extent necessary to render the same valid, legal and enforceable, and the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby nor shall the validity, legality or enforceability of such provision be affected thereby in any other jurisdiction, and will be replaced with a suitable and equitable provision that carries out the intent and purpose of such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will not, and will not permit any of its Subsidiaries to, sell, lease or otherwise transfer any property or assets to, or purchase, lease or otherwise acquire any property or assets from, or otherwise engage in any other transactions with, any of their Affiliates, except (a) in the ordinary course of business at prices and on terms and conditions not less favorable to the Borrower or such Subsidiary than could be obtained on a comparable arm’s-length basis from unrelated third parties and (b) any Restricted Payment permitted by Section 7.5 ; provided however, this Section 7.7 shall not be deemed to prohibit any of the transactions or relationships with Affiliates contemplated by the agreements listed on Schedule 7.7 .

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: a dispositional review hearing could not be combined with a termination of parental rights proceeding because doing so "would bypass the steps established by the Legislature for final determination of a child's status." Id. at 816. AE. addresses a situation where the parents did not yet have the opportunity to fulfill the service plan, and thus, a termination hearing at the same time as the permanency hearing was inappropriate. See id. However, here, the juvenile court did not conduct a disposi-tional hearing and a termination hearing at the same time-it held a permanency hearing and a termination hearing concurrently. Utah Code Ann. § 78-8a-312(6)(c)(8upp.2000) explicitly allows termination and permanency hearings to be combined. Cf. In re KM., 965 P.2d 576, 582 (Utah Ct.App.1998) (<HOLDING>). C. Ruling Regarding Permission to Medicate Options: A. holding that 2253 analysis may be done at the time the claim for relief is determined B. holding proper for permanency plan to be determined at dispositional hearing C. holding that the constitutional level of punitive damages is not a finding of fact that must be determined by the jury it may be determined de novo by the court D. holding state of the law must be determined at time of challenged action E. holding that where perception of bias arose during the hearing then it was proper for counsel to move for disqualification at the hearing and then to later reduce motion to writing to be in compliance with rule

assistant: The best answer is B. holding proper for permanency plan to be determined at dispositional hearing
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by the Company and, assuming due and valid authorization, execution and delivery by Seller, constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Company, enforceable against the Company in accordance with its terms, except as limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, fraudulent conveyance and other similar laws of general application affecting enforcement of creditors’ rights generally and general principles of equity.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AGREEMENT WILL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO THE CONFLICTS OF LAWS PROVISIONS THEREOF. SC AND YOU AGREE TO SUBMIT ANY ACTION TO ENFORCE THIS AGREEMENT AND ANY OTHER ACTION ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO YOUR EMPLOYMENT WITH SC, OTHER THAN AN ACTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER SECTION 9 OF THIS AGREEMENT, TO BINDING ARBITRATION UNDER THE LETTER AGREEMENT AND THE ARBITRATION POLICY SET OUT IN EXHIBIT D TO THE LETTER AGREEMENT.

assistant: Jurisdictions
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: interest on their claims, but they disagree as to the rate at which such interest should accrue. In this regard, plaintiffs first argue that the lower courts erred in holding that their claims to postpetition interest at the statutory rates are modifiable under II U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2). Alternatively, plaintiffs assert that the confirmed interest rates are insufficient to provide them with the present value, of their allowed secured claims under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(a)(5)(B)(ii). We address each of these contentions in turn. (1) 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2) Section 1322(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code provid 84) (finding IRS Hen on debtor’s principal residence modifiable because statutory, not created by agreement as required by § 1322(b)(2)); In re Seel, 22 B.R. 692, 695-96 (Bankr.D.Kan.1982) (<HOLDING>). Nevertheless, plaintiffs urge us to hold that Options: A. holding modifiable a mechanics hen on debtors principal residence because it was a statutory hen B. holding that citys tax hen on debtors principal residence was modifiable despite 1322b2 because not consensual and thus not a security interest C. holding that agency relationship existed where principal paid plaintiff directly and written agreement stated agent was signing on behalf of principal D. holding that 1322b2 prohibits modification of the interest rate on the loan on the debtors principal residence E. holding residence means legal residence for will probate

assistant: The best answer is A. holding modifiable a mechanics hen on debtors principal residence because it was a statutory hen
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: 458 U.S. at 186 n. 9, 102 S.Ct. 3034; see also Lillbask, 397 F.3d at 85 (citation omitted). The second factor requires that “a reasonable expectation of repetition” must be “more than a theoretical possibility.” B.J.S. ex rel. N.S. v. State Educ. Dep’t/Univ. of the State of N.Y., 815 F.Supp.2d 601, 612 (W.D.N.Y.2011) (quotation omitted). “Mere speculation that the parties will be involved in a dispute over the same issues does not rise to the level of a reasonable expectation or demonstrated probability of recurrence.” Dennin v. Conn. Interscholastic Athletic Conference, Inc., 94 F.3d 96, 101 (2d Cir.1996). The fact that a plaintiff has repeatedly challenged each IEP developed does not establish the requisite “reasonable expectation” of repetition. See B.J.S., 815 F.Supp.2d at 613 (<HOLDING>). The court in B.J.S. found that the plaintiffs Options: A. recognizing presumption B. holding that the presumption that a plaintiff will continue to challenge an iep year after year regardless of what is recommended by the cse does not create a reasonable expectation of recurrence C. recognizing that courts will indulge in every reasonable presumption against waiver of the constitutional right to trial by a jury D. holding that guidelines create a rebuttable presumption E. recognizing that a temporary use of property does not automatically create an expectation of privacy in that property

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the presumption that a plaintiff will continue to challenge an iep year after year regardless of what is recommended by the cse does not create a reasonable expectation of recurrence
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 together with the Plan (as each may be amended from time to time) and the Resolutions supersede any and all other prior understandings and agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and constitute the sole and only agreements between the parties with respect to the said subject matter. All prior negotiations and agreements between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof are merged into this Agreement, the Plan and the Resolutions. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises, or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party or by anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied in this Agreement, the Plan or the Resolutions and that any agreement, statement or promise that is not contained in this Agreement, the Plan or the Resolutions shall not be valid or binding or of any force or effect.

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: Each of the Holder has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement, to perform its obligations hereunder and thereunder and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby. This Agreement constitutes a valid and legally binding obligation of each of the Holder, enforceable in accordance with their respective terms.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 69 See, e.g., Jones u. State, 272 Ga. 900, 901 (2) (537 SE2d 80) (2000); Payne v. State, 290 Ga. App. 589, 589-90 (2) (660 SE2d 405) (2008). 70 OCGA § 17-8-57. 71 Id. 72 Id.; see Thomas v. State, 240 Ga. 393, 400 (3) (242 SE2d 1) (1977); O’Hara v. State, 241 Ga. App. 855, 859 (3) (528 SE2d 296) (2000). However, “remarks of a judge assigning a reason for his ruling are neither an expression of opinion nor a comment on the evidence.” Johnson v. State, 246 Ga. 126,128 (V) (269 SE2d 18) (1980); see also Cochran v. State, 136 Ga. App. 125, 127 (3) (220 SE2d 477) (1975). Additionally, the Supreme Court of Georgia recently held that questioning whether an element has been proven is not error even when made before the jury. See State v. Gardner, 286 Ga. 633, 634-35 (690 SE2d 164) (2010) (<HOLDING>), reversing Gardner v. State, 296 Ga. App. 792 Options: A. holding that verbal threats such as we going to get you you better drop the suit do not rise to the level of adverse action B. holding the district courts noconsent finding was not clearly erroneous because the individual felt she was under arrest and had to submit to the patdown search in part based on the officers saying this is what we do we talk to people we search peoples bags we pat search people this is what we do everyday C. holding that we lack jurisdiction to consider claims that have not been raised before the bia D. holding that we generally may not consider issues not raised before the bia E. holding that judges statement before jury to prove venue did you prove venue why dont we go ahead and do that before we forget was not error

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that judges statement before jury to prove venue did you prove venue why dont we go ahead and do that before we forget was not error
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed effective upon personal delivery or upon deposit in the United States Mail, by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, or by deposit to and delivery by an overnight delivery service, addressed to the other party at the address shown above, or at such other address or addresses as either party shall designate to the other in accordance with this Section 9.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: recovery of those litigation expenses. We disagree. “Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy. One petitioning for the writ of mandamus must show ‘(1) a clear legal right ... to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.’ ” Ex parte City of Irondale, 686 So.2d 1127, 1128 (Ala.1996) (quoting Ex parte Johnson, 638 So.2d 772, 773 (Ala.1994)). See also Ex parte Alfab, Inc., 586 So.2d 889, 891 (Ala.1991); and Ex parte Edgar, 543 So.2d 682, 684 (Ala.1989). As discussed above, LaConsay and Wet-zel did attempt to appeal from the probate court’s October 17, 2006, order, but the circuit court dismissed those appeals because the proba pp. 2003) (<HOLDING>). In the second appeals, the circuit court Options: A. recognizing a defendants right to appeal when a court fails to award litigation expenses in a condemnation action B. recognizing no right to damages if landowner retains reasonable access to property after a condemnation C. recognizing the right to counsel on appeal D. holding that defendant forfeits right to have issue considered on appeal when he fails to object to misconduct at trial E. holding that there is no right to monetary compensation for a regulatory taking in an inverse condemnation action

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing a defendants right to appeal when a court fails to award litigation expenses in a condemnation action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of Issuer and SBA with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior agreements and undertakings, both written and oral, between Issuer and SBA with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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: To the extent of Seller’s actual knowledge, and except for tenant eviction and rent collection matters, there is no material litigation affecting the Property or Seller (being the entity named as “Seller” on this Agreement and this representation does not extend to any other entity related directly or indirectly to Seller), which litigation is not covered by insurance (subject to reasonable deductibles). Seller shall promptly notify Purchaser if Seller receives any written notice after the date of this Agreement and prior to Closing of a material litigation affecting the Property which is not covered by insurance (subject to reasonable deductibles).

assistant: Litigations
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: 184-192; Pl. Opp. at 8 n. 15. 186 . See FAC ¶¶ 351-358; Pl. Opp. at 8 n. 15. 187 . See FAC ¶¶ 279-287; Pl. Opp. at 8 n. 16. 188 . See FAC ¶¶ 206, 372. 189 . See id. ¶ 300. 190 . See id. ¶¶ 222-228, 318-324, 387-393. 191 . See id. ¶¶ 229-234. - 192 . See Berman v. Sugo LLC, 580 F.Supp.2d 191, 202 (S.D.N.Y.2008) (dismissing a breach of contract claim where counterclaim plaintiff failed to "set forth a single fact relating to the formation of the contract, the date it took place, the contract’s major terms, the parties to the contract, or [counter-defendant's] assent to its terms”) (quotation marks omitted). 193 . See Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949. 194 . See Levy v. Bessemer Trust Co., N.A., No. 97 Civ. 1785, 1997 WL 431079, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. July 30, 1997); Sedona Corp., 2005 WL 1902780, at *20 (<HOLDING>). 195 . See FAC ¶¶ 3, 61-64, 189, 281, 291, Options: A. holding failure to establish terms of an oral loan agreement precluded the existence of a breach of contract claim B. holding part performance of an oral agreement necessary to take the oral agreement out of the statute of frauds must be consistent only with the existence of the alleged oral contract C. holding breach of contract claim not preempted as a straightforward breach of contract action as it alleged violation of specific covenant D. recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract E. holding that a laundry list of alleged breaches of myriad alleged oral and written agreements was insufficient to provide defendants with notice of the breach of contract claim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a laundry list of alleged breaches of myriad alleged oral and written agreements was insufficient to provide defendants with notice of the breach of contract 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: Buyer and Sellers shall hold all confidential or proprietary information obtained in connection with the provision by a Party of the Transition Services or receipt by a Party of the Transition Services and relating to Sellers’ or Buyer’s business (“ Confidential Information ”) confidential. The receiving party shall not disclose any Confidential Information of the disclosing party to any third party unless the receiving party is legally compelled to disclose such information, in which event the disclosing party shall provide the receiving party with written notice of such legal compulsion to disclose.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: any notices or other communications provided by niantic under these terms , including those regarding modifications to these terms , will be given : ( a ) via email , or ( b ) by posting to the services .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Bonneville Int’l Corp. v. State Tax Comm’n, 858 P.2d 1045, 1048 (Utah Ct.App.1993) (internal brackets omitted) (quoting Morton Int’l Inc. v. State Tax Comm’n, 814 P.2d 581, 590 (Utah 1991)). Furthermore, the term “may” is generally construed to be “permissive and not mandatory” and is generally not interpreted to limit options, but, rather, to clearly define some of those options. See Salt Lake On Track v. Salt Lake City, 939 P.2d 680, 681 (Utah 1997) (noting statute providing city “ ‘may by ordinance grant franchises to railroad and street railroad companies ... ’ empowers a city to grant a franchise [but] is not the exclusive means by which a city may permit a third party to install a railroad on city streets”); Banberry Dev. Corp. v. South Jordan City, 631 P.2d 899, 901 (Utah 1981) (<HOLDING>); Dehm v. Dehm, 545 P.2d 525, 528 (Utah 1976) Options: A. holding that the legislature clearly intended that authority over water quality not be exercised in a manner that significantly compromises the appropriative rights of present or future water users B. holding statute providing city may collect water fees in the same manner as for the collection of sewer fees is permissive not mandatory and poses no statutory prohibition against the collection of a water connection fee in different manner C. recognizing a partys right to receive postjudgment fees for collection when the original judgment awarded that party attorney fees D. holding that article x 2 of the california constitution dictates the basic principles defining water rights that no one can have a protectible interest in the unreasonable use of water and that holders of water rights must use water reasonably and beneficially E. holding defendant liable for attorneys fees when the guaranty contract at issue provided for the payment of collection costs and expenses

assistant: The best answer is B. holding statute providing city may collect water fees in the same manner as for the collection of sewer fees is permissive not mandatory and poses no statutory prohibition against the collection of a water connection fee in different manner
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: officer’s safety would be prejudiced by an open courtroom in this case had sufficient weight in the balance. But cf. Ayala v. Speckard, 89 F.3d 91, 95-96 (2d Cir.1996) (no justification under Waller for a “rule that, despite- the Sixth Amendment, no undercover officer who intends to return to undercover work need testify in open court”), vacated on rehearing en banc, Ayala v. Speckard, 131 F.3d 62 (2d Cir.1997). (ii) Narrow tailoring of the closure. The courtroom was closed only for the length of the officer’s brief testimony. The transcript of the proceeding, never sealed, was available to the public. Under these circumstances, the closure was no broader than necessary to protect the State’s interest in ensuring the safety of the undercover officer. See Ayala, 131 F.3d at 72 (<HOLDING>). Brown contends that the closure was overly Options: A. holding the excluded testimony was relevant to whether a signature was that of a deceased party and since a statement regarding the issue was the only testimony that could be given by the witness no offer to prove was necessary because the substance of the evidence was apparent from the context of the question asked B. holding that in order to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to call a witness to testify the claimant must allege 1 the identity of the potential witness 2 that the witness was available to testify at trial 3 the substance of the witnesss testimony and 4 an explanation of how the omission of the testimony prejudiced the case C. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting testimony to only one witness where additional witnesses would have provided the same testimony D. holding that excluding expert testimony was harmless and did not affect the jury verdict because the subject matter of the testimony was only one factor and by no means a determinative one E. holding that closure was limited not only because it lasted only for the testimony of one witness but also because there was no limitation at all on the right of the public or the press to examine the transcript of the officers testimony

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that closure was limited not only because it lasted only for the testimony of one witness but also because there was no limitation at all on the right of the public or the press to examine the transcript of the officers testimony
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: There are no pending or, or to the Knowledge of Victory, threatened Actions against Victory or its Subsidiaries or by which its or their assets may be bound except as specifically disclosed in the SEC Reports or in the Disclosure Schedule. Neither Victory nor any Subsidiary, nor to Victory’s Knowledge, any director or officer thereof (in his or her capacity as such), is or has been the subject of any Action involving a claim of violation of or liability under federal or state securities laws or a claim of breach of fiduciary duty, except as disclosed in the Disclosure Materials. There has not been, and to Victory’s Knowledge, there is not pending or contemplated any investigation by the SEC involving Victory or any current or former director or officer of Victory (in his or her capacity as such). The SEC has not issued any stop order or other order suspending the effectiveness of any registration statement filed by Victory or any Subsidiary under the Exchange Act or the Securities Act. For purposes of this Agreement, “ Action ” as to any Person, means any action, suit, inquiry, notice of violation, proceeding (including any partial proceeding such as a deposition) or investigation pending or threatened in writing against or affecting such Person, any of such Person’s Subsidiaries or any of such Person’s or such Subsidiaries’ respective properties, before or by any Governmental Body, arbitrator, regulatory authority (federal, state, county, local or foreign), stock market, stock exchange or trading facility.

assistant: Litigations
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 of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of the Company are set forth in the Prospectus and Prospectus Supplement. The Company owns, directly or indirectly, all of the capital stock or other equity interests of each Subsidiary free and clear of any Liens, and all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of each Subsidiary are validly issued and are fully paid, non-assessable and free of preemptive and similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. Except as limited by applicable law, the Company or one of its Subsidiaries has the unrestricted right to vote, and to received dividends and distributions on, all capital securities of its Subsidiaries owned by the Company or such Subsidiary. If the Company has no subsidiaries, all other references to the Subsidiaries or any of them in the Transaction Documents shall be disregarded.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 388 U.S. 440 87 S.Ct. 2091 18 L.Ed.2d 1302 David E. KENEYv.NEW YORK. No. 2. Supreme Court of the United States June 12, 1967 Eugene Gressman, for petitioner. James H. Biben, for respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the County Court of Monroe County, New York. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the County Court of Monroe County, New York, is reversed. Redrup v. State of New York, 386 U.S. 767, 87 S.Ct. 1414, 18 L.Ed.2d 515. 2 Mr. Justice HARLAN adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 496, 77 S.Ct. 1304, 1 L.Ed.2d 1498, and A Book Named 'John Cleland's' Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure v. Attorney General of Com. of Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413, 455, 86 S.Ct. 975, 16 L.Ed.2d 1, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm.

assistant: 3
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Grantor hereby waives, to the extent permitted by applicable Laws, all rights of redemption, appraisement, valuation, stay, extension or moratorium now or hereafter in force under any applicable Laws in order to prevent or delay the enforcement of this Agreement or the absolute sale of the Collateral or any portion thereof. In the event that the proceeds of any sale, collection or realization are insufficient to pay all amounts to which the Administrative Agent or the holders of the Obligations are legally entitled, the Grantors shall be jointly and severally liable for the deficiency, together with interest thereon at the Default Rate, together with the costs of collection and the fees, charges and disbursements of counsel. Any surplus remaining after the full payment and satisfaction of the Obligations shall be returned to the Grantors or to whomsoever a court of competent jurisdiction shall determine to be entitled thereto.

assistant: Waivers
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: v. NLRB, 663 F.2d 455, 458-59 (3d Cir. 1981) (clear and unmistakable waiver of right to strike over administration of pension fund held unnecessary where general contract term extended scope of no-strike clause beyond scope of arbitration clause). We believe it consistent with the Act that the arbitrator’s decision in the present case clearly and unmistakably recognized the existence of the special duties of union officials. To go further and require that the Board rather than the arbitrator must be the one to declare the meaning of the parties’ agreement would be to give to the Board a power that Congress has denied it. See discussion of NLRB v. C & C Plywood Corp., infra. 22 . The court cited New Orleans Steamship Ass’n v. General Longshore Workers, 626 F.2d 455, 468 (5th Cir. 1980) (<HOLDING>), cert. granted sub nom. Jacksonville Bulk Options: A. holding that trial court erred by entering an injunction sua sponte as an injunction cannot be entered unless a pleading requests one B. holding that the court may issue an injunction prohibiting a defendant from repeating statements determined at trial to be defamatory C. holding that district court erred in ruling that a particular item of evidence must be admitted in the arbitral proceeding D. holding that district court erred in dismissing the indictment based on sufficiency of evidence E. holding that district court erred in issuing injunction against future work stoppages based on arbitral award prohibiting one such stoppage

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that district court erred in issuing injunction against future work stoppages based on arbitral award prohibiting one such stoppage
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 shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue shall exist in Boulder County for the resolution of any matter relating to this Agreement and each party submits to the jurisdiction of such Court.

assistant: Venues
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 on her return a company manager told Watson in a four-hour meeting in which she cried constantly that she was a poor and incompetent supervisor; that a manager transferred supervisory duties away from her and told her to go home; and that a personnel manager told her that she was considered a bitch and that she could either resign or be demoted to a position in which she would be supervised by her subordinate trainees. We believe that these facts, though covering a shorter period than that in Nolan, could constitute the necessary aggravating factors such that a trier of fact could (but not necessarily would) conclude that a reasonable person would find the conditions so intolerable and discriminatory as to justify resigning. See Ford v. Alfaro, 785 F.2d 835, 841-42 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>); Bailey v. Binyon, 583 F.Supp. 923, 924-25, Options: A. holding claims based on the fair labor standards act subject to arbitration B. holding in a fair labor standards act case that a constructive discharge occurred when an employee was physically threatened on one occasion harassed over the next two weeks and not given sufficient work instructions to perform his job C. holding right to liquidated damages under fair labor standards act nonwaivable D. holding that discriminatory pay reduction under fair labor standards act does not constitute continuing violation E. holding that the otca limitations period applied to a claim alleging a breach of the fair labor standards act by the state

assistant: The best answer is B. holding in a fair labor standards act case that a constructive discharge occurred when an employee was physically threatened on one occasion harassed over the next two weeks and not given sufficient work instructions to perform his job
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries owns, or has a valid license to use, all Intellectual Property necessary for the conduct of its business as currently conducted free and clear of all Liens except as permitted by the Loan Documents, except where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. To the Borrower’s knowledge, no holding, injunction, decision or judgment has been rendered by any Governmental Authority against the Borrower or any Restricted Subsidiary and neither the Borrower nor any of its Restricted Subsidiaries has entered into any settlement stipulation or other agreement which would limit, cancel or question the validity of the Borrower’s or any Restricted Subsidiary’s rights in, any Intellectual Property in any respect that would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. To Borrower’s knowledge, no claim has been asserted or threatened or is pending by any Person challenging or questioning the use by the Borrower or its Restricted Subsidiaries of any Intellectual Property owned by the Borrower or any of its Restricted Subsidiaries or the validity or effectiveness of any Intellectual Property, except as would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. To the Borrower’s knowledge, the use of Intellectual Property by the Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries does not infringe on the rights of any Person in a manner that would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. The Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries take all reasonable actions that in the exercise of their reasonable business judgment should be taken to protect their Intellectual Property, including Intellectual Property that is confidential in nature, except where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: these terms of use shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of new york , excluding its conflicts of law rules , and the united states of america .

assistant: Choice of law