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: injury. Further, NAMI contends that Insignia failed to establish claims for unlawful monopoly or attempted monopoly and for unlawful exclusive dealing or unlawful boycott. The Court begins by addressing the merits of Insignia’s anti-trust claims, and then turns to Insignia’s disparagement claims. B. Injury to Insignia A plaintiff seeking damages under antitrust laws must show that the alleged anticompetitive practices in fact caused it injury. See 15 U.S.C. § 15(a). That is, “[i]n order to prevail plaintiffs must prove for each claim ... a causal relationship between the violation and the injury.” Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp., 207 F.3d 1039, 1054 (8th Cir.2000) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Read v. Med. X-Ray Ctr., P.C., 110 F.3d 543, 545 (8th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). 1. Evidence of Loss of Business NAMI contends Options: A. holding that on a motion for summary judgment the mere existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the plaintiffs position will be insufficient and there must be evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the plaintiff B. holding that the district court was permitted to find conduct that had been acquitted by the jury when determining the defendants sentence C. holding at summary judgment that the plaintiff had to show a reasonable jury could find the defendants allegedly anticompetitive conduct was a material cause of plaintiffs injury D. holding where reasonable difference of opinion as to whether the defendants act was the or a proximate cause of the injury the matter is for the jury to decide E. holding that at the summary judgment stage there must be sufficient evidence on which the jury could find for the plaintiff

assistant: The best answer is C. holding at summary judgment that the plaintiff had to show a reasonable jury could find the defendants allegedly anticompetitive conduct was a material cause of plaintiffs 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 442 (3d Cir. 2005) (explaining that Garlotte permits review of expired sentence even if consecutive term currently being served was imposed by different court at different time); Foster v. Booker, 296 F.3d 947, 950 (10th Cir.2002) (reasoning that petitioner serving later in series of consecutive sentences imposed by same sovereign can challenge the expired sentence). Thus, the district court had jurisdiction to consider Miller’s belated challenge to the revocation of his parole on those long-expired terms. Miller first argues that the execution of the parole-violator warrant was invalid because the deputy marshals disregarded the Parole Commission’s instruction not to execute the warrant if he was “already in state custody.” He relies on Barnard, v. Henman, 89 F.3d 373 (7th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>), to argue that an invalidly executed warrant Options: A. holding that the crossappeal time limit is jurisdictional B. holding that it is a violation of the fourth amendment for police to bring members of the media or other third parties into a home during the execution of a warrant when the presence of third parties in the home was not in aid of the execution of the warrant C. holding valid conditions for execution of the warrant which are constitutionally satisfactory stated in the affidavit that solicits the warrant and accepted by the issuing magistrate D. holding warrant valid where search warrant application affidavit was signed and probable cause existed for issuance of warrant E. holding that 90day time limit in which to conduct revocation hearing is triggered only by valid execution of paroleviolator warrant

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that 90day time limit in which to conduct revocation hearing is triggered only by valid execution of paroleviolator warrant
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, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect its legal existence and its respective rights, licenses, permits, privileges and franchises except where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; provided that the foregoing shall not prohibit any merger, consolidation, Division, liquidation or dissolution permitted under Section 6.03.

assistant: Existence
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: n. 5), the Court need not reach this issue. 27 . 11 Del. C. § 1336(j). Since, as stated above, the Delaware Wiretap Statute is patterned after the federal wiretap statute, it is especially informative to consider the legislative history of t 276 Cal.Rptr. 679, 802 P.2d 169, 194 (1990), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 924, 112 S.Ct. 337, 116 L.Ed.2d 277, reh’g denied, 502 U.S. 1009, 112 S.Ct. 650, 116 L.Ed.2d 667 (1991) (reiterating that the statements found in DeLancie and Donaldson that police may monitor conversations of pretrial detainees only to ensure security and the public’s protection, but not to discover information that may be used against such detainees at trial); Donaldson v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Cal.Supr., 35 Cal.3d 24, 196 Cal.Rptr. 704, 672 P.2d 110, 116 (1983) (<HOLDING>); DeLancie v. Superior Court of San Mateo Options: A. holding that purpose of the amendment was to clarify the definition of the word maintain B. holding before the advent of the federal rules of evidence that the use of a tax return for the purpose of impeachment was proper C. holding that effect of suit rather than the purpose for which it was brought is controlling for purposes of the fifth factor D. holding that title iii only proscribes unlawful interceptions defined as listening or monitoring of telephone conversations not the recording of monitored conversations hence if monitoring is lawful recording is always lawful E. recognizing that delancie implied that secret monitoring of conversations between detainees and visitors undertaken for the purpose of gathering evidence for use in criminal proceedings rather than to maintain the security of the jail was unlawful

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that delancie implied that secret monitoring of conversations between detainees and visitors undertaken for the purpose of gathering evidence for use in criminal proceedings rather than to maintain the security of the jail was unlawful
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: law, the “plaintiff has the burden of proving the applicable standard of care, the defendant’s failure to meet that standard, and the causal relationship between that failure and the plaintiffs injury.” Godfrey, 559 F.3d at 572. Under District of Columbia law, “if the subject in question i testimony is not always “required to establish the standard of care in cases involving supervision .... ” Godfrey, 559 F.3d at 572. Rather, “as to the need for expert testimony, the factual context matter[s].” Id. at 573. See also Daskalea v. District of Columbia, 227 F.3d 433, 445 (D.C.Cir.2000) (explaining that expert testimony is not necessary to establish negligence when the conduct at issue is “persistent, open and notorious”); District of Columbia v. Tulin, 994 A.2d 788, 795 (D.C.2010) (<HOLDING>). Specifically, the cases finding expert Options: A. holding that expert testimony should not be admitted as to a matter that is obviously within the common knowledge of jurors because such testimony almost by definition can be of no assistance B. holding that expert testimony is unnecessary where the case is not a case in which lay jurors would be unable to grasp the issues without expert assistance C. holding that jurors do not need expert testimony on matters of common knowledge D. recognizing that the need for the expert was so great that the decision to preclude the expert effectively amounted to dismissal of case E. holding that a request for funds for expert testimony must show inter alia that the testimony is crucial and is subject to varying expert opinions

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that expert testimony is unnecessary where the case is not a case in which lay jurors would be unable to grasp the issues without expert assistance
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 reliance on the representations, warranties, covenants and agreements contained in this Seventh Amendment, and subject to the satisfaction of the conditions precedent set forth in Section 3 hereof, the Credit Agreement shall be amended effective as of the Seventh Amendment Effective Date in the manner provided in this Section 2 .

assistant: Amendments
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: is defined as "First Health Strategies, Inc., or such other firm, person or corporation appointed by the Trustees to perform the duties required herein to be performed by the Contract Administrator." Id. at ALS52 (Art. I) (emphasis added). 9 . The court overrules plaintiff's objections to defendants' evidence (Bates Stamped ALS197-200, see Kurzon Decl. Ex. G) since it has already reviewed the materials. However, this additional material has no impact on the outcome here. 10 . The court also noted that its construction was consistent with law applicable to Social Security claims. Bruce, 2003 WL 21005313, *6 n. 12 (citing Willis v. Callahan, 979 F.Supp. 1299, 1305 (D.Or.1997)). See Black & Decker Disability Plan v. Nord, 538 U.S. 822, 833, 123 S.Ct. 1965, 155 L.Ed.2d 1034 (2003) (<HOLDING>). 11 . Defendants also rely on Smith v. Unum Options: A. holding that erisa does not require plan administrators to give special deference to treating physicians opinions although administrators may not arbitrarily refuse to credit them B. holding that erisa does not preempt the plaintiffs claim that the erisa plan administrator is liable for medical malpractice where the plaintiff premised the claim solely on state law and did not invoke the erisa plan C. holding that unlike the social security disability program erisa does not require plan administrators to give special deference to the opinions of treating physicians and noting that there are critical differences between the two programs that nothing in erisa requires employers to establish employee benefit plans and that erisa does not mandate what kind of benefits employers must provide if they choose to have such a plan quotations omitted D. holding that when employers serve as plan administrators they assume the role of fiduciary under erisa E. holding that erisa does not require plan administrators to give special deference to treating physicians opinions

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that unlike the social security disability program erisa does not require plan administrators to give special deference to the opinions of treating physicians and noting that there are critical differences between the two programs that nothing in erisa requires employers to establish employee benefit plans and that erisa does not mandate what kind of benefits employers must provide if they choose to have such a plan quotations omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Vendor has submitted a Physician Ownership & Compensation Certification (“Certification”) to HealthTrust and represents and warrants to the continued accuracy of the information provided therein. Vendor will submit a renewed and updated Certification upon request of HealthTrust. Vendor will also provide HealthTrust with thirty (30) days’ advance written notice prior to entering into any transaction inconsistent with the representations and warranties of Sections 14.16.1 (Physician Ownership Interests) and 14.16.2 (Physician Compensation Arrangements). Upon receipt of any such notice, HealthTrust may immediately terminate this Agreement, without penalty or prejudice, by written notice to Vendor.

assistant: Terminations
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 Buyer shall have all rights and remedies set forth in this Agreement and all rights and remedies which it has been granted at any time under any other agreement or contract and all of the rights which such holders have under any Law. Each party hereto shall be entitled to enforce its rights hereunder specifically (without posting a bond or other security or proving actual damages), to recover damages by reason of any breach of any provision of this Agreement and to exercise all other rights granted by Law. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, neither party hereto shall be entitled to consequential, special, exemplary, indirect or incidental damages hereunder.

assistant: Remedies
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 Confidentiality Agreement sets forth the entire agreement and understanding between the Company and me relating to the subject matter herein and merges all prior discussions and communications between the Company and me relating to the same. No modification or amendment to this Confidentiality Agreement, nor any waiver of any rights under this Confidentiality Agreement, will be effective unless in writing and signed and delivered by each of the Company and me. Any subsequent change or changes in my duties, obligations, rights, or compensation will not affect the validity or scope of this Confidentiality Agreement.

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: effect at the time Simmons committed his offense, or the 2002 Guidelines, which were in effect on the date of his sentencing. Federal law requires judges presumptively to apply the sentencing Guidelines as they exist at the time of sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (“The court, in determining the particular sentence to be imposed, shall consider ... the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range ... set forth in the guidelines ... that ... are in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced-”). The Constitution’s Ex Post Facto Clause, however, prevents the Government from imposing additional penalties for crimes that have already been committed. See U.S. Const, art. I. § 9, cl. 3 (“No ... ex post facto Law shall be passed.”); Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 386, 390, 1 L.Ed. 648 (1798) (<HOLDING>). Consequently, although courts must Options: A. holding that a change in parole law violates the ex post facto clause if the change in the law created a sufficient risk of increasing the measure of punishment attached to the covered crimes B. holding that the fact that a retroactive law may have a deleterious effect on an individual does not mean that it is ex post facto punishment C. holding that one way in which the ex post facto provision of the constitution can be violated is by applying a law that makes more burdensome the punishment of a crime after its commission D. holding that every law that changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed is an ex post facto law within the words and the intent of the prohibition E. holding that an ex post facto claim can only be successful if the law can be characterized as punishment in the constitutional sense

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that every law that changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime when committed is an ex post facto law within the words and the intent of the prohibition
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 Amendment, the Credit Agreement and the other Loan Documents constitute the entire agreement among the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and thereof and supersede all other prior agreements and understandings, both written and verbal, among the parties hereto 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Inc. v. Long Island R.R. Co., 70 N.Y.2d 382, 389, 521 N.Y.S.2d 653, 516 N.E.2d 190, (1987), quoted in Langenberg v. Sofair, 2006 WL 3518197, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Dec.7, 2006). See also Sofi Classic S.A. de C.V. v. Hurowitz, 444 F.Supp.2d 231, 247-48 (S.D.N.Y.2006), quoting Rocanova v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y of U.S., 83 N.Y.2d 603, 612 N.Y.S.2d 339, 634 N.E.2d 940, 943-44 (1994) (“To recover punitive damages for a tort claim that ‘arises from’ a related contract claim, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the alleged misconduct was aimed at the public generally and that the misconduct evinced a ‘high degree of moral turpitude’ such as to imply a ‘criminal indifference to civil obligations.’ ”); Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. v. Allegheny Energy Inc., 382 F.Supp.2d 411, 422 (S.D.N.Y.2003) (<HOLDING>). Sellers have produced no evidence of any Options: A. holding that exhaustion requirement applies to excessive force claims B. recognizing fraud in the inducement claims independent of contract claims without discussion of economic loss rule C. holding claimant did not have to segregate fees between fraud and contract claims because both claims were based on the same set of facts and circumstances D. holding that sovereign immunity also applies to cross claims and third party claims E. holding that the public harm requirement applies to fraudulent inducement claims because the fraud claims arise from related contract claims

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the public harm requirement applies to fraudulent inducement claims because the fraud claims arise from related contract claims
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: fees does not allow attorney’s fees to be recovered against a municipal utility district. Tex.Civ. PRAC. & Rem.Code Ann. § 38.001 (Vernon 1986). We agree. This issue has been decided in the District’s favor by the Austin Court of Appeals in Lake LBJ Municipal Utility District v. Coulson, 839 S.W.2d 880 (Tex.App.—Austin 1992, no writ) (interpreting former TexRev. Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 2226, since repealed). The Austin Court in Coulson held, in effect, that a municipal utility district was neither an individual nor a corporation such that a person could recover attorney’s fees against it, thus disagreeing with the opinion of the Beaumont Court of Appeals in Wickersham Ford, Inc. v. Orange County. Id. at 890-94; Wickersham Ford, 701 S.W.2d 344, 348-49 (Tex.App.—Beaumont 1985, no writ) (<HOLDING>). We agree with the Austin Court that the term Options: A. holding that county defendant was a person within meaning of fca for purposes of suit by private plaintiff B. holding that a police department is not a person within the meaning of section 1983 C. holding that orange county is a person within meaning of former texrevcivstatann art 2226 D. holding that a state is not a person within the meaning of 1983 E. holding that a state was embraced within the meaning of the word person where the word person was defined as meaning and including a partnership association company or corporation as well as a natural person

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that orange county is a person within meaning of former texrevcivstatann art 2226
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 Survey of such Real Estate, together with the Surveyor Certification, and evidence of payment of all real estate taxes, assessments and municipal charges on such Real Estate which on the date of determination are required to have been paid under §7.8.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the General Counsel alleged both a § 8(d) contract modification and a § 8(a)(5) unilateral change, and that the Board therefore erred in failing to apply the clear and unmistakable waiver standard to their unilateral change claim. Alternatively, the Unions argue that the sound arguable basis standard incorporates the clear and unmistakable waiver standard. A. The General Counsel’s Allegations As a preliminary matter, the Board contends that the Unions are barred under Section 10(e) of the NLRA, 29 U.S.C. § 160(e), from arguing that the General Counsel alleged a § 8(a)(5) unilateral change violation because the Unions did not move for reconsideration of the Board’s sua sponte holding. See Woelke & Romero Framing, Inc. v. NLRB, 456 U.S. 645, 665-66, 102 S.Ct. 2071, 72 L.Ed.2d 398 (1982) (<HOLDING>); Int’l Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union v. Options: A. holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to consider an argument not presented to the board in a motion for reconsideration B. holding that the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction to consider whether the board had erred in finding that certain picketing was lawful because no party had raised the issue to the board either during the initial proceedings or on motion for reconsideration C. holding that the district court was authorized to remand the proceedings to the board where the board failed to make required findings D. holding that the denial of enforcement on the basis that the board lacked a proper quorum did not deprive the board of jurisdiction to consider the case anew E. holding that an associations president who was not a party before the board of appeals was not entitled to appeal the boards decision granting a zoning application that his association had opposed in the board proceedings

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction to consider whether the board had erred in finding that certain picketing was lawful because no party had raised the issue to the board either during the initial proceedings or on motion for reconsideration
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: by rejecting any change , you are agreeing that you will arbitrate any dispute between you and academia.edu in accordance with the provisions of this `` dispute resolution '' section as of the date you first accepted these terms ( or accepted any subsequent changes to these terms ) .

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: distinction between tribal trust land and reservations for the purpose of tribal sovereign immunity. See Oklahoma Tax Comm’n, 498 U.S. at 511, 111 S.Ct. 905. This view is consonant with other federal court holdings that an Indian reservation includes trust lands. See United States v. John, 437 U.S. 634, 649, 98 S.Ct. 2541, 57 L.Ed.2d 489 (1978) (finding “no apparent reason” why lands held in trust should not be considered a “reservation” under § 1151(a)); HRI, Inc. v. EPA, 198 F.3d 1224, 1249-54 (10th Cir.2000) (same); United States v. Azure, 801 F.2d 336, 339 (8th Cir.1986) (considering tribal trust land to be Indian country under either § 1151(a) as a “de facto” reservation or § 1151(b) as a dependent Indian community); United States v. Sohappy, 770 F.2d 816, 822-23 (9th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>). Petitioners note that, for several years, EPA Options: A. holding that a third party who receives trust property on inquiry notice that a trustee has misappropriated trust funds is also liable for breach of trust B. holding that trust land is a reservation under 1151a C. holding that the beneficiary of a trust was not the real party in interest regarding rights owned by the trust D. recognizing general proposition that if land is artificially submerged for the statutory period necessary to change ownership of the land title to the submerged land is passed to the state in trust for the public E. holding that the oneida tribe could not unilaterally revive its ancient sovereignty over land through openmarket purchases from current titleholders even though the land had previously been reservation land

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that trust land is a reservation under 1151a
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 AMENDMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS REPRESENT THE FINAL AGREEMENT AMONG THE PARTIES HERETO AND THERETO AND MAY NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES. THERE ARE NO UNWRITTEN ORAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARTIES.

assistant: Integration
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 party shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain the confidentiality of any information concerning the parties or any subsidiary of another party provided to or discovered by it or its representatives as a result of the transaction contemplated by the Transaction Documents and which is not otherwise available on a nonconfidential basis to such party and shall not (except as may otherwise be appropriate or required under applicable Law or the rules and regulations of the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations System or The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC) disclose such information, subject to the provisions of this Section, to anyone other those persons who have a need to know such information in connection with the conduct of such party’s business, including its attorneys, accountants and other representatives and agents or during the course of or in connection with any litigation or other action, arbitration, investigation or other proceeding based upon or in connection with the subject matter of this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTERNAL SUBSTANTIVE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE RULES THEREOF RELATING TO CONFLICTS OF LAW OTHER THAN SECTION 5-1401 OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, AND THE OBLIGATIONS, RIGHTS AND REMEDIES HEREUNDER SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THE VALIDITY OR PERFECTION OF THE SECURITY INTEREST HEREUNDER, OR THE REMEDIES HEREUNDER, ARE GOVERNED BY THE LAWS OF ANY JURISDICTION OTHER THAN 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of any actual or threatened breach of the provisions of this Agreement or any separation and release agreement, the party who claims such breach or threatened breach shall give the other party written notice and, except in the case of a breach which is not susceptible to being cured, ten calendar days in which to cure. In the event of a breach of any provision of this Agreement or any separation and release agreement by Executive, (i) Executive shall reimburse Company : the full amount of any payments made under section 2(b)(i) or (ii) or section 3(b)(i) of this Agreement (as the case may be), (ii) Company shall have the right, in addition to and without waiving any other rights to monetary damages or other relief that may be available to Company at law or in equity, to immediately discontinue any remaining payments due under subparagraph 2(b)(i) or (ii) or subparagraph 3(b)(i) of this Agreement (as the case may be) including but not limited to any remaining Salary Portion of Severance payments, and (iii) the Severance Period or the CIC Severance Period (as the case may be) shall thereupon cease, provided that Executive’s obligations under, if applicable, any separation and release agreement shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with their terms for the entire duration of the Severance Period or CIC Severance Period as applicable. In addition, Executive acknowledges that Company will suffer irreparable injury in the event of a breach or violation or threatened breach or violation of the provisions of this Agreement or any separation and release agreement and agrees that in the event of an actual or threatened breach or violation of such provisions, in addition to the other remedies or rights available to under this Agreement or otherwise, Company shall be awarded injunctive relief in the federal or state courts located in North Carolina to prohibit any such violation or breach or threatened violation or breach, without necessity of posting any bond or security.

assistant: Remedies
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: From time to time, as and when required by the Surviving Corporation or by its successors or assigns, there shall be executed and delivered on behalf of Ashford (DE) such deeds and other instruments, and there shall be taken or caused to be taken by it all such further and other action, as shall be appropriate, advisable or necessary in order to vest, perfect or confirm, of record or otherwise, in the Surviving Corporation the title to and possession of all property, interests, assets, rights, privileges, immunities, powers, franchises and authority of Ashford (DE), and otherwise to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. The officers and directors of the Surviving Corporation are fully authorized in the name and on behalf of Ashford (DE) or otherwise, to take any and all such action and to execute and deliver any and all such deeds and other instruments.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company and NETWORK 1 may from time to time supplement or amend this Placement Agent’s Warrant without the approval of any of the Holders in order to cure any ambiguity, to correct or supplement any provision contained herein that may be defective or inconsistent with any other provisions herein, or to make any other provisions in regard to matters or questions arising hereunder that the Company and NETWORK 1 may deem necessary or desirable and that the Company and NETWORK 1 deem shall not adversely affect the interest of the Holders. All other modifications or amendments shall require the written consent of and be signed by the party against whom enforcement of the modification or amendment is sought.

assistant: Amendments
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: (i) Company corporate and enter and perform obligations Agreement; (ii) execution and Agreement by Company, consummation by transactions contemplated and and issuance, and Shares duly authorized by corporate and further authorization the Board Directors or stockholders required; and (iii) Agreement has executed and delivered and constitutes valid and obligation against in accordance with terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, securities, insolvency, similar laws relating affecting enforcement of, creditors’ rights and remedies, by principles of general application.

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: Issues Deutsch had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issues in the Minnesota Action. He responded to the Plaintiffs’ complaint, and there is no evidence that he was denied an opportunity to fully litigate the case. Indeed, Deutsch’s failure to meaningfully participate in the Minnesota Action was a result of his own intentional thwarting of the discovery efforts by the Plaintiffs: he refused to provide documents to the Plaintiffs, failed to attend his deposition and failed to comply with several discovery orders. (Minn Declaration, Ex. C (State Court Findings) at 18-19.) Under Minnesota law,-a. default judgment is “a final determination of the facts essential to its existence,” even if the defendant did not interpose a defense in the action. See, e.g., Brandi, 179 B.R. at 626 (<HOLDING>). Deutsch should not be permitted to avoid the Options: A. holding that party to a default judgment had full and fair opportunity to be heard on the adjudicated issue even though the party did not put forth a defense because it did not timely serve an answer to the complaint B. holding that the plaintiff did not establish a waiver where the defendants answer had put the plaintiff on notice of an arbitration defense C. holding on summary judgment that an attorney who failed to timely file an answer leading to a default judgment was on notice that a malpractice claim might be filed against him D. holding that a party against whom a motion for summary judgment is filed is entitled to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard E. holding that the concept of collateral estoppel cannot apply when the party against whom the earlier decision is asserted did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate that issue in the earlier case

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that party to a default judgment had full and fair opportunity to be heard on the adjudicated issue even though the party did not put forth a defense because it did not timely serve an answer to the complaint
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as disclosed to the Lender in writing prior to the date hereof, directly or through any ERISA Affiliate , (a) adopt, create, assume or become a party to any Pension Plan, (b) incur any obligation to contribute to any Multiemployer Plan, (c) incur any obligation to provide post-retirement medical or insurance benefits with respect to employees or former employees (other than benefits required by law) or (d) amend any Plan in a manner that would materially increase its funding obligations.

assistant: Erisa
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 an on duty police officer; and (2) Petitioner had a significant history of violent felony convictions. The jury found no mitigating circumstances. Because the jury found at least one aggravating circumstance and no mitigating circumstances, the jury was required to impose the death penalty in accordance with the Pennsylvania capital sentencing statute. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9711(c)(l)(iv). 2 . At this stage, the Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed and vacated the death sentence because the prosecutor's argument violated Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320, 105 S.Ct. 2633, 86 L.Ed.2d 231 (1985). Caldwell set forth a standard for determining when remarks about the appellate process, made during the penalty phase in a capital case, constitute reversible error. Id. at 328, 105 S.Ct. 2633 (<HOLDING>). The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that the Options: A. holding that a jury cannot be led to believe that they do not possess responsibility for deciding the appropriateness of the death penalty B. holding that a death sentence for a conviction for the rape of a child where the crime did not result and was not intended to result in death of the victim was barred by the eighth amendment C. holding it is constitutionally impermissible to rest a death sentence on a determination made by a sentencer who has been led to believe that the responsibility for determining the appropriateness of the defendants death rests elsewhere D. holding that if a trial court has rejected death as a possible sentence double jeopardy bars the state from seeking the death penalty at resentencing even where rejection of the death sentence was based on a legal error E. holding unconstitutional defendants sentence of death based upon the holding in roper supra and remanding for the montgomery circuit court to set aside the defendants death sentence and to sentence him to the only other sentence available life in the penitentiary without the possibility of parole

assistant: The best answer is C. holding it is constitutionally impermissible to rest a death sentence on a determination made by a sentencer who has been led to believe that the responsibility for determining the appropriateness of the defendants death rests elsewhere
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: in addition , spotify makes no representation nor does it warrant , endorse , guarantee , or assume responsibility for any third party applications ( or the content thereof ) , user content , or any other product or service advertised or offered by a third party on or through the spotify service or any hyperlinked website , or featured in any banner or other advertising .

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: attempt to , or harass , abuse , or harm , or advocate or incite harassment , abuse , or harm of another person , group , including supercell employees , including supercell 's customer service representatives .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This 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 Agreement 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AGREEMENT, INCLUDING THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE PARTIES HERETO, SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (INCLUDING SECTIONS 5-1401 AND 5-1402 OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATIONS LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BUT WITHOUT REGARD TO ANY OTHER CONFLICTS OF LAW PROVISIONS THEREOF). This Agreement is executed by the Additional Originators for the benefit of the Buyer, and its assigns, and each of the foregoing parties may rely hereon. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, the Additional Originators and their successors and permitted assigns. The Originators that are not Additional Originators, and the Buyer join in this Agreement for purposes of consenting to the addition of the Additional Originators and amending the Purchase and Sale Agreement as contemplated by Section 4. Administrative Agent joins in this Agreement to evidence its consent to the addition of the Additional Originators and the amendments contemplated in Section 4.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except to the extent caused by the negligent acts or willful misconduct of Tenant or any of its agents, employees, contractors or representatives, Landlord shall indemnify, defend (through attorneys reasonably acceptable to Tenant) and hold harmless Tenant and its Affiliates, officers, directors, owners, members, agents and employees from and against all third party claims and associated lawsuits, damages, losses, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees actually incurred) arising or resulting from: (i) Landlord’s construction of the Landlord’s Work or any defects therein; (ii) any negligence or willful misconduct of Landlord or any of its agents, employees, contractors or representatives (including, without limitation, Contractor and Architect) occurring on the Premises during construction of Landlord’s Work or related to Landlord’s Work; or (iii) any dispute between Landlord and any contractor, subcontractor, supplier or other Person (excluding Tenant) related to the construction of the Landlord’s Work, including, but not limited to Contractor and Architect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There are no Legal Proceedings pending or, to the knowledge of Investor, threatened against Investor, or to which Investor is otherwise a party before any Governmental Authority, which, if adversely determined, would reasonably be expected to result, individually or in the aggregate, in an Investor Material Adverse Effect. Investor is not subject to any Order of any Governmental Authority except to the extent the same would not reasonably be expected to result, individually or in the aggregate, in an Investor Material Adverse Effect.

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: 11. No rights or obligations other than those expressly set out in this Agreement are to be implied and nothing contained in this Agreement: b. confers upon the Receiving Party a licence or other transfer of rights in respect of any Party’s interest in any Information or in any present or future patent or patent application; or

assistant: Yes
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: a party shall be excused from any delay or failure in performance hereunder due to any labor dispute , government requirement , act of god , internet congestion or breakdown , or any other cause beyond its reasonable control .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements and understandings between the Company and Grantee relating to the grant of the Restricted Stock, whether oral or otherwise, provided however that this Agreement shall not supersede any agreement (including any employment agreement) with the Company or policy of the Company relating to confidentiality, no-solicitation, no-hire, non-competition, non-disparagement or recoupment of compensation, including but not limited to that certain Restrictive Covenants and Confidentiality Agreement of even date herewith by and between the Company and Grantee.

assistant: Integration
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: 460 U.S. 491, 506, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 1329, 75 L.Ed.2d 229, 242 (1983) (plurality opinion)). “[C]ommon sense and ordinary human experience must govern over rigid criteria.” Id. at 477, 706 A.2d 180. In addition, police conduct during a traffic stop must be evaluated “within the context of unfolding events.” Diloreto, supra, 180 N.J. at 277, 850 A.2d 1226. Many jurisdictions have found that running an NCIC cheek, in addition to a driver’s license check, is within the scope of a traffic stop and is permissible so long as it does not unreasonably extend the time of the stop. See McRae, supra, 81 F.3d at 1535-36 n. 6 (explaining that during traffic stop, officer may access NCIC records to determine quickly existence of outstanding warrants); State v. Lopez, 873 P.2d 1127, 1133 (Utah 1994) (<HOLDING>); see also People v. McGaughran, 25 Cal.3d 577, Options: A. holding that prolonged detention beyond time necessary to write citation was unreasonable absent reasonable suspicion of criminal activity B. holding warrant check lawful if detention not extended beyond time necessary to request license and registration and issue citation C. holding detention of passenger for warrant check violated fourth amendment absent reasonable suspicion D. holding warrant check not unreasonable where detention not extended solely for that purpose E. holding encounter became improper detention when officer took passengers license back to police car to run warrant check

assistant: The best answer is B. holding warrant check lawful if detention not extended beyond time necessary to request license and registration and issue citation