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: ” Wright, 79 S.W.3d at 52 (quoting Earle v. Ratliff, 998 S.W.2d 882, 890 (Tex.1999)). Furthermore, in assessing the report’s sufficiency, the trial court may not draw any inferences, and instead must rely exclusively on the information contained within the report’s four corners. See Scoresby, 346 S.W.3d at 556 (citing Palacios, 46 S.W.3d at 878); Wright, 79 S.W.3d at 53. B. Hillery’s objection Hillery’s objection to Dr. Goldman’s report in the trial court stated, in its entirety: Dr. Goldman’s report is inadequate because it is eonclusory and fails to provide any factual support for the opinion expressed within. Dr. Goldman states that myocardial infarction was ruled out as the cause of Mrs. Kyle’s arrest. However, Dr. Goldman fails to provide any factual supp Waco 2008, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). C. Adequacy of report concerning causation As Options: A. holding that two general objections were insufficient to properly preserve the issue B. holding that when defendants only timely filed objections to expert report were that two statements were speculative defendant waived all other objections C. holding that failure to make repeated objections is not ineffective when such objections would not have been sustained D. holding that issue is preserved if the objections at the trial were sufficiently specific to notify the trial court at the time of the nature and character of the objections and the reasons for them E. holding that a party waived its objections on appeal to an affidavit presented in support of a motion for summary judgment by failing to raise its objections to the trial court

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that when defendants only timely filed objections to expert report were that two statements were speculative defendant waived all other objections
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: SUN and its Subsidiaries are insured by insurers of recognized financial responsibility against such losses and risks and in such amounts as are prudent and customary in the businesses in which they are engaged. SUN does not have any reason to believe that it or any of its Subsidiaries will not be able to renew its existing insurance coverage as and when such coverage expires or to obtain similar coverage from similar insurers as may be necessary to continue its business.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth in the SEC Documents, none of the officers, directors or employees of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries has entered into any transaction with the Company or any of its Subsidiaries that would be or will be required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K of the SEC.

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: for a sentence reduction because he was sentenced as a career offender. Gibson now appeals the ruling. We are bound by this court’s decision in United States v. Moore “unless and until it is overruled by this [C]ourt en banc or by the Supreme Court.” United States v. Brown, 342 F.3d 1245, 1246 (11th Cir.2003). Where a retroactively applicable guideline amendment reduces a defendant’s base offense level, but does not alter the sentencing range upon which his sentence was based, the District Court is not authorized to grant a sentence reduction pursuant to § 3582(c)(2). Moore, 541 F.3d at 1330. This includes the situation in which a retroactive amendment to § 2Dl.l(c) would result in a lower base offense level, but the defendant was sentenced as a career offender. See id. at 1326-30 (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, we held in Moore that a Options: A. holding that while amendment 706 was applicable to the defendants in question because it reduced their base offense levels a reduction was not authorized because the amendment did not have the effect of lowering their applicable guideline ranges because of the application of the career offender guideline B. holding a reduction in defendants sentence as a career offender was not authorized under 3582c2 because amendment 706 did not lower his applicable guideline range under the careeroffender guidelines C. holding that while amendment 706 was applica ble to the defendants in question because it reduced their base offense levels a reduction was not authorized because the amendment did not have the effect of lowering their applicable guideline ranges because of the application of the career offender guideline D. holding that amendment 706 did not have the effect of lowering the applicable guideline range where the defendants received statutory mandatory minimum sentences and thus the defendants were not eligible for relief under 3582 E. holding that a defendant whose original sentence was based upon the careeroffender guideline and not 2d11 could not receive a sentence reduction based on amendment 706 because it did not have the effect of lowering the applicable guideline range

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a defendant whose original sentence was based upon the careeroffender guideline and not 2d11 could not receive a sentence reduction based on amendment 706 because it did not have the effect of lowering the applicable guideline range
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 Loan Agreement and the other Loan Documents embody the entire agreement and understanding of the parties hereto and supersede any and all prior agreements, arrangements and understandings relating to the matters provided for herein and therein. No alteration, waiver, amendments, or change or supplement hereto shall be binding or effective unless the same is set forth in writing by a duly authorized representative of the Lender.

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: “[T]he resolution of debarment cases ‘is a serious matter’ that has an immediate and profound effect on the particular individuals involved.” Canales, 2007 WL 2071709, *5 n. 5 (quoting Commercial Drapery Contractors, Inc. v. United States, 133 F.3d 1, 6 (D.C.Cir.1998)). In this case, it appears that the Debarring Official acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner in resolving the plaintiffs’ debarment proceeding. Because the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim under the APA disputing those actions, the public interest favors Feinerman, and the evidence adduced by the plaintiffs establishes that Feinerman will suffer some form of irreparable injury absent injunctive relief, the Court will grant the plaintiffs’ motion with respect to Feinerman. See CityFed, 58 F.3d at 747 (<HOLDING>). At the same time, “[i]t frequently is Options: A. holding that success on a motion to sever requires a strong showing of prejudice B. holding that a movant that clearly establishes likelihood of success on the merits receives the benefit of a presumption of irreparable harm C. holding that injunctive relief may be warranted where there is a particularly strong likelihood of success on the merits even if there is a relatively slight showing of irreparable injury D. holding that a court may issue injunctive relief only when the movant demonstrates four factors substantial likelihood of success on the merits irreparable harm no substantial injury to the other party and furtherance of the public interest E. holding that even when likelihood of success has been established the absence of irreparable injury standing alone makes preliminary injunctive relief improper

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that injunctive relief may be warranted where there is a particularly strong likelihood of success on the merits even if there is a relatively slight showing of irreparable 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: rather, he must point to § 3553(a) factors that support a lower sentence. See id. This he has failed to do. Rather, he argues only that the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness announced in Mykytiuk conflicts with United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), because “it has the effect of making the Guidelines mandatory, unless the defendant can show that his sentence should be outside of the Guidelines.” We have repeatedly rejected this argument, holding that a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness is consistent with Booker. See, e.g., United States v. Hankton, 463 F.3d 626, 630 n. 5 (7th Cir. 2006) (rejecting argument that applying rebuttable presumption renders guidelines mandatory); United States v. Williams, 436 F.3d 767, 769 (7th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). We are mindful that the Supreme Court of the Options: A. recognizing conflict between circuits B. recognizing an exception to the conflict rule where the conflict arose after the award of the contract C. recognizing conflict D. recognizing that mykytiuk avoids conflict with booker E. recognizing the conflict

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that mykytiuk avoids conflict with booker
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: stated that he conveyed all plea-bargain offers to appellant. Following the hearing, the trial court denied appellant’s motion for new trial. Appellant’s issue in this appeal states generally that he complains of ineffective assistance of counsel during the “plea bargain process.” Appellant specifically complains of ineffective assistance concerning his counsel’s alleged failure on October 3 to convey the 15-year plea-bargain offer made by the State; appellant argues that he lacked sufficient time to consider the offer that he admittedly rejected on October 4. At the hearing on his motion for new trial, however, appellant complained of ineffective a rwise — between the error and the judgment of guilt. Sanchez v. State, 98 S.W.3d 349, 353 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>); but see Brink v. State, 78 S.W.3d 478, 484 Options: A. holding that because judgment of youngs guilt was not rendered independently of trial courts ruling on motion to suppress evidence of offense and judgment would not be supported without that evidence error not waived by plea of guilty B. holding that a defendants guilty plea was unconditional where the guilty plea was not in writing and the government did not consent to it being conditional C. holding that a brady violation is waived by guilty plea D. holding that courts mention of a guilty plea and acceptance of responsibility to defense counsel was not reversible error E. holding that appellants plea of guilty was not rendered independently of trial courts ruling on motion to reveal identity of confidential informant and that error was thus not waived by plea of guilty because informants testimony was relevant to and needed for defense to prosecution

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that appellants plea of guilty was not rendered independently of trial courts ruling on motion to reveal identity of confidential informant and that error was thus not waived by plea of guilty because informants testimony was relevant to and needed for defense to prosecution
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: Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of compliance with any term or condition contained in the Credit Agreement or any of the other Loan Documents (except as specifically provided for herein) or constitute a course of conduct or dealing among the parties. Except as expressly stated herein, Administrative Agent and Lenders reserve all rights, privileges and remedies under the Loan Documents. Except as amended or modified hereby, the Credit Agreement and other Loan Documents remain unmodified and in full force and effect. All references in the Loan Documents to the Credit Agreement shall be deemed to be references to the Credit Agreement as amended or modified hereby.

assistant: No 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: considerable amount of pain and suffering on a victim.”) with (Tr. 1/26/82, at 150) (defining torture as either a murder that is “especially atrocious, heinous, or cruel manifesting exceptional depravity” or one that involves the “intention to inflict pain, suffering, or both pain and suffering.”). As pain was the crux of Pursell’s defense, the trial court’s failure to instruct on this point had serious ramifications. See supra at 335-37, 394-95. Again, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s failure to explore this difference was objectively unreasonable. Finally, the Court’s conclusion was devoid of reasoning. The Court dismissed Pursell’s claim in two conclusive sentences. It never cited Godfrey, a case that clearly governed Pursell’s claim. See Stringer, 503 U.S. at 227-29, 112 S.Ct. 1130 (<HOLDING>). It never acknowledged that the “especially Options: A. holding that the unconstitutionality of the especially heinous atrocious or cruel instruction was compelled by godfrey B. holding that issue of inadequate jury instruction was waived because the instruction given was the one expressly requested by defense counsel C. holding that when no objection was made to jury instruction evidence to support finding based on instruction should be assessed in light of the instruction given D. holding prosecutors misstated the law as applied to oklahomas heinous atrocious or cruel aggravating circumstances and additionally encouraged the jurors to decide the question on the basis or sympathy for the victims E. holding that defendant was not entitled to entrapment instruction when there was insufficient evidence to support such an instruction

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the unconstitutionality of the especially heinous atrocious or cruel instruction was compelled by godfrey
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 binding upon and inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, including any direct or indirect successor by purchase, merger, consolidation or otherwise to all or substantially all of the business and/or assets of the Company, spouses, heirs, executors and personal and legal representatives. This Agreement shall continue in effect regardless of whether Indemnitee continues to serve as an officer or director of the Company or of any other enterprise at the Company’s request.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to be the case on appeal. In the event that the sum exceeds the actual, reasonable fees and expenses, there is no explanation as to why the trial court feels that the excess should be awarded to the estate. See Lowder v. All Star Mills, Inc., 103 N.C. App. 500, 501, 405 S.E.2d 774, 775 (upholding Rule 11 sanction awarding $2,918.82 in attorneys’ fees and expenses and an additional $1,000.00 to be paid to the clerk of superior court as an additional sanction), disc. review denied, 330 N.C. 118, 409 S.E.2d 595 (1991). Only if the trial court includes findings of fact regarding how it came to choose the particular sanction imposed can this Court determine whether or not the sanction represents an abuse of discretion. Cf. Spicer v. Spicer, 168 N.C. App. 283, 287, 607 S.E.2d 678, 682 (2005) (<HOLDING>). We, therefore, affirm the trial court’s Options: A. holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the best interest of the children require the continuation of primary physical custody with defendant and secondary custody with plaintiff and the trial court failed to make sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law for this court to determine whether the guidelines were followed B. holding that even under an abuse of discretion standard the trial court must make sufficient find ings of fact and conclusions of law to allow the reviewing court to determine whether a judgment and the legal conclusions that underlie it represent a correct application of the law C. holding that the grant of an injunction is reviewed for abuse of discretion but without deference to the legal conclusions of the trial court D. holding that a trial courts judgment must comply with the statutory requirement that the judgment contain written findings of fact and conclusions of law E. holding that only a gross abuse of discretion will justify the reviewing court in disturbing the trial courts conclusions

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that even under an abuse of discretion standard the trial court must make sufficient find ings of fact and conclusions of law to allow the reviewing court to determine whether a judgment and the legal conclusions that underlie it represent a correct application of the law
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: as criminals.” Id. at 567, 156 L. Ed. 2d at 518. Concerns about these far-reaching consequences, therefore, “counsel against attempts by the State, or a court, to define the meaning of the relationship or to set its boundaries absent injury to a person or abuse of an institution the law protects.” Id. The Supreme Court provided guidance as to those boundaries, however, suggesting four areas where legitimate state interests justified intrusion into the personal and private life of an individual. Id. at 578, 156 L. Ed. 2d at 525-26. Lawrence stated: “The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public condu E.2d 215, 218 (2004) (<HOLDING>); State v. Clark, 161 N.C. App. 316, 321, 588 Options: A. holding that conduct charged under article 120k ucmj was not plainly private when the sexual activity occurred while in the presence of two additional servicemembers in the unlocked barracks room of two other servicemembers who were reasonably likely to unintentionally observe the sexual activity and therefore the failure of the military judge to raise a lawrence issue sua sponte was not plain error B. holding that classifying the defendant as a sexually oriented offender after he was convicted of kidnapping minors without a sexual purpose violated the defendants right to substantive due process where the statutory definition of sexual offender included one who had committed certain criminal offenses against a minor regardless of sexual intent C. holding contradictory testimony does not invalidate a verdict D. holding that debtors failure to list minor child as creditor precluded dischargeability of minors claim despite debtors listing of minors parent E. holding lawrence does not invalidate charges of criminally prohibited sexual activity with minors

assistant: The best answer is E. holding lawrence does not invalidate charges of criminally prohibited sexual activity with minors
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 Vice General Manager shall assist the General Manager and shall have such other powers and duties as may be prescribed by the Board of Directors from time to time after consultation with the General Manager and DNP Asia Pacific or Photronics Singapore, who is entitled to appoint the Vice General Manager at that time.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, all records and data relating to Employees shall, in each case, be subject to the confidentiality provisions of the Separation Agreement and any other applicable agreement and applicable law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company agrees that if the Executive is made a party or is threatened to be made a party to any action, suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative (a “ Proceeding ”), by reason of the fact that the Executive is or was a trustee, director or officer of the Company, or is or was serving at the request of the Company or any subsidiary as a trustee, director, officer, member, employee or agent of another corporation or a partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, including, without limitation, service with respect to employee benefit plans, whether or not the basis of such Proceeding is alleged action in an official capacity as a trustee, director, officer, member, employee or agent while serving as a trustee, director, officer, member, employee or agent, the Executive shall be indemnified and held harmless by the Company to the fullest extent authorized by Delaware law, as the same exists or may hereafter be amended, against all Expenses incurred or suffered by the Executive in connection therewith, and such indemnification shall continue as to the Executive even if the Executive has ceased to be an officer, director, trustee or agent, or is no longer employed by the Company, and shall inure to the benefit of his heirs, executors and administrators.

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: 410.025(d), 410.169, 413.055(a); 28 Tex. Admin. Code §§ 126.7(a), (c)(3), 133.306(b). Here, SORM agreed that Lawton’s injury was compensable. When it later disputed the extent of that injury, it was governed by the deadline applicable to such disputes, not the sixty-day deadline governing compensability. A carrier has up to forty-five days from the date it receives a complete medical bill to dispute whether that treatment was necessary. See 28 Tex. Admin. Code §§ 124.3(e); 133.240(a). That is the time frame applicable here. “[T]he [Division] could have easily formulated exceptions in the language of a general rule.” Rodriguez, 997 S.W.2d at 255. Because the Division has not done so, the court of appeals’ reliance on an appeals panel decision to the contrary was improper. Id. at 254-55 (<HOLDING>). To the extent some cases have held Options: A. holding that deference is owed to an agencys interpretation of its own categorical exclusion regulations so long as that interpretation is not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation B. holding that a secretarys interpretation of a departments regulation is controlling unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation C. holding interpretation may not be inconsistent with regulation D. holding that courts should defer to agencys interpretation of its own regulations if not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation E. holding that while courts defer to the divisions interpretation of its own regulation they cannot do so if that interpretation is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation quoting public util commn of tex v gulf states util co 809 sw2d 201 207 tex1991

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that while courts defer to the divisions interpretation of its own regulation they cannot do so if that interpretation is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation quoting public util commn of tex v gulf states util co 809 sw2d 201 207 tex1991
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of novelty and obviousness that routinely arise under §§ 102 and 103.” 437 U.S. at 588, 98 S.Ct. 2522. The Court has since reiterated that those separate inquiries do not bear on the question of subject-matter eligibility under § 101. Diehr, 450 U.S. at 188-89, 101 S.Ct. 1048 (“The ‘novelty’ of any element or steps in a process, or even of the process itself, is of no relevance in determining whether the subject matter of a claim falls within the § 101 categories of possibly patentable subject matter.”); id. at 191, 101 S.Ct. 1048 (“A rejection on either of these [anticipation or obviousness] grounds does not affect the determination that respondents’ claims recited subject matter which was eligible for patent protection under § 101.”); see also Mayo, 132 S.Ct. at 1298-1300, 1302 (<HOLDING>). An “inventive concept” in the § 101 context Options: A. recognizing that the courts own prior decisions shielding the guidelines from vagueness challenges were no longer consistent with supreme court precedent B. holding that a condition was precedent to performance because the contract language did not explicitly state that it was precedent to formation C. holding that a threejudge panel may depart from circuit precedent that has not been expressly overruled when an intervening en banc or supreme court decision has undercut the theory or reasoning underlying the prior circuit precedent in such a way that the cases are clearly irreconcilable D. holding was consistent with diehr and flook and did not depart from case law precedent E. holding a prior case was not precedent on an issue when the issue was not contested

assistant: The best answer is D. holding was consistent with diehr and flook and did not depart from case law precedent
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: “personal” to some creditors or “general” as to all is relevant only “after a claim has been analyzed to determine whether it is properly assertable by the debtor or creditor, and not as a substitute for the analysis itself.” In re Seven Seas Petroleum, 522 F.3d at 588 (construing In re Schimmelpenninck, 183 F.3d 347 (5th Cir.1999) (emphasis added)). For instance, a claim that would ordinarily be brought by creditors nonetheless belongs to the debtor’s estate if it pursues property in which the debtor retains an equitable interest, see, e.g., In re MortgageAmerica Corp., 714 F.2d 1266, 1275 (5th Cir.1983) (construing a fraudulent transfer claim to belong to the debtor’s estate), or if the debtor itself could have brought the claim under applicable state law, see, e.g., id. at 1276-77 (<HOLDING>); In re S.I. Acquisition, Inc., 817 F.2d 1142, Options: A. holding that where the entity was incorporated in texas and the shareholders reside in texas and the bankruptcy case is pending in texas texas law not arizona law should be applied B. holding an alter ego action could be brought by the debtor corporation under texas law C. holding that a fraudulent transfer claim against a corporate debtors control person belongs to the corporate debtor not to specific creditors D. recognizing a cause of action under texas law for misappropriation E. holding texas law permits a corporate debtor to bring a trust fund denuding action

assistant: The best answer is E. holding texas law permits a corporate debtor to bring a trust fund denuding 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: The Grantee acknowledges that a waiver by the Company of breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any other provision of this Agreement, or of any subsequent breach by the Grantee.

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: Concurrently with any Change in Control event or a business combination that may impact the legal implications of this Agreement, the Company, TTEC Parent shall cause any successor or transferee to assume unconditionally, by written instrument delivered to Executive, all of the obligations of the Company and TTEC Parent hereunder. Failure of the Company or TTEC Parent to obtain such assumption prior to the effectiveness of any Change in Control event or other business combination, shall be a breach of this Agreement and shall constitute Good Reason entitling the Executive to resign, within thirty (30) calendar days of consummation of such Change of Control event or business combination, and receive compensation and benefits as provided in Section 7(i).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: .a personal belief in the witness’ credibility. A jury could Reasonably believe the prosecutor’s indications if ... the prosecutor implicitly vouches for the witness’ veracity by indicating that information not presented to the jury supports the testimony. United States v. Eyster, 948 F.2d 1196, 1206 (11th Cir.1991) (citations omitted); see also United States v. Martinez, 96 F.3d 473, 476 (11th Cir.1996) (“[AJrgument to the jury "must be básed solely on the evidence admitted at trial”). The prosecutor^ statement that Darlene Steele’s testimony would have “corroborated” Bill Steele’s was an improper attempt to bolster Bill Steele’s credibility plain error question where cumulative effect of errors compelled reversal); cf. United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457, 1462 (11th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). The elements of this case — the introduction Options: A. holding that although prosecutorial misconduct alone would not have merited reversal the cumulative effect of the errors committed by the judge and the prosecutor denied the defendants a fair trial B. holding that the failure to identify and distinguish which claims of prosecutorial misconduct have been previously litigated and which were waived permits rejection of the underlying claims of prosecutorial misconduct which in turn eviscerates the cognizable layered claims C. holding that alleged prosecutorial misconduct must be evaluated in light of the prosecutors argument and the entire record and if a review of the record convinces the court that the jury would have convicted defendant even if it were not exposed to the alleged improper prosecutorial comments then no actual prejudice occurred D. holding prosecutorial misconduct claim barred by procedural default E. recognizing that the court sanctions more harshly for cumulative misconduct than for isolated misconduct

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that although prosecutorial misconduct alone would not have merited reversal the cumulative effect of the errors committed by the judge and the prosecutor denied the defendants a fair trial
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: AND IT IS SO ORDERED. 1 . The Court notes that to the extent any of the following Findings of Fact constitute Conclusions of Law, they are adopted as such, and to the extent any Conclusions of Law constitute Findings of Fact, they are so adopted. 2 . Hereafter, the Court shall refer to provisions of the Bankruptcy Code by section number only. 3 . On December 10, 2004, the South Carolina Department of Revenue and Taxation filed an objection the Debtors' Chapter 13 plan. The Debtors and the South Carolina Department of Revenue and Taxation have apparently resolved their issues by settlement. 4 . "Chapter 20” is commonly known as the process by which a bankruptcy debtor files a Chapter 7 case and thereafter files a Chapter 13 case. See In re Taylor, 261 B.R. 877, 883 (Bankr.E.D.Va.2001) (<HOLDING>); In re Cushman, 217 B.R. 470, 476 Options: A. recognizing that a debt ors sequential filing of a chapter 7 petition and then a chapter 13 petition is the socalled chapter 20 B. holding tort action accruing after original chapter 7 petition not part of estate when case converted to chapter 13 and then back to chapter 7 C. holding that the conversion of a chapter 7 petition to a chapter 13 petition was not final until the plan itself was approved D. holding that an order striking a standing trustees motion to convert a chapter 13 petition to a chapter 7 is interlocutory not final E. holding that facts as they existed on the date of the original bankruptcy petition not on the date of conversion from chapter 13 to chapter 7 bankruptcy applied

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that a debt ors sequential filing of a chapter 7 petition and then a chapter 13 petition is the socalled chapter 20
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, comply with all laws, rules, regulations and orders of any Governmental Authority applicable to it or its property, except where the failure to do so, individually or in the aggregate, could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. The Borrower will, and will cause its Subsidiaries and their respective officers and employees and will use its best efforts to cause its directors and agents, to be in compliance with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions in all material respects.

assistant: Compliance With 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 shall be binding upon and benefit Indemnitors and Indemnitee and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns. Any holder of the Note and any affiliate of Lender which acquires all or part of the Property by any sale, assignment or foreclosure under the Security Instrument or by deed or other assignment in lieu of foreclosure shall be a successor of this Agreement. In no event shall any Indemnitee be bound by any obligations or liabilities of any Indemnitor even if any such Indemnitee acquires ownership of all or any part of the Property.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice to be given under the terms of this Agreement to the Company shall be addressed to the Company in care of the Secretary of the Company at t he Company’s principal office, and any notice to be given to Participant shall be addressed to Participant at Participant’s last address reflected on the Company’s records. By a notice given pursuant to this Section 5.7 , either party may hereafter designate a different address for notices to be given to that party. Any notice which is required to be given to Participant shall, if Participant is then deceased, be given to the person entitled to exercise his or her Option pursuant to Section 4.1 hereof by written notice under this Section 5.7 . Any notice shall be deemed duly given when sent via email or when sent by certified mail (return receipt requested) and deposited (with postage prepa id) in a post office or branch post office regularly maintained by the United States Postal Service.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the extent that the receipt of the Restricted Shares, the receipt of dividends on the Restricted shares before they vest, or the vesting of the Restricted Shares results in compensation income to the Participant for Federal, state or local income tax purposes, the Participant shall deliver to the Company at the time the Company (or a Subsidiary or Affiliate) is obligated to withhold taxes in connection with such receipt or vesting, as the case may be, such amount as the Company requires to meet its withholding obligation under applicable tax laws or regulations, and if the Participant fails to do so, the Company has the right and authority to deduct or withhold from other compensation payable to the Participant an amount sufficient to satisfy its withholding obligations. Upon the vesting of the Restricted Shares in a situation where the Company is obligated to withhold taxes, the Participant may satisfy the withholding requirement, in whole or in part, by electing to have the Company withhold for its own account that number of Restricted Shares otherwise deliverable to the Participant hereunder on the date the tax is to be determined having an aggregate Fair Market Value on the date the tax is to be determined equal to the minimum statutory total tax that the Company must withhold in connection with the vesting of such Shares. Such election must be irrevocable, and submitted to the Company’s Human Resources Director before the applicable vesting date.

assistant: Tax Withholdings
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: Non-Agricultural Employment H-2B Program; Delay of Effective Date; Impact on Prevailing Wage Determinations, 76 Fed. Reg. 82116-01 (Dec. 30, 2011); Wage Methodology for the Temporary Non-Agricultural Employment H-2B Program; Delay of Effective Date, 76 Fed. Reg. 73508-01 (Nov. 29, 2011); Wage Methodology for the Temporary Non-Agricultural Employment H-2B Program; Postponement of Effective Date, 76 Fed. Reg. 59896-01 (Sept. 28, 2011). 15 . Wage Methodology for the Temporary Non-Agricultural Employment H-2B Program; Delay of Effective Date, 77 Fed. Reg. 60040-01 (Oct. 2, 2012). 16 . In remanding the 2008 Prevailing Wage Rule, Judge Poliak adopted the framework set out by the D.C. Circuit in Allied-Signal Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n., 988 F.2d 146, 150-51 (D.C.Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). In applying Allied-Signal, Judge Poliak Options: A. holding that the court may consider collateral evidence of the circumstances surrounding the execution of the agreement in determining whether the language of the agreement is unclear and if the evidence presented is so plain that no reasonable person could hold any way but one then the court may interpret the meaning as a matter of law B. holding that in determining whether the district court had correctly calculated fraud loss the jurys acquittal establishes only that there was reasonable doubt as to the defendants involvement with such conduct and the district court was still free indeed obliged to consider whether his involvement had been proved by a preponderance of the evidence C. holding that in determining whether to vacate regulations that violate the apa a court should consider the seriousness of the rules deficiencies and thus the extent of doubt whether the agency chose correctly and the disruptive consequences of an interim change that may itself be changed D. holding that the district court should consider the totality of the circumstances in determining whether the patentee acted in subjective bad faith and should consider whether circumstantial evidence would support an inference of bad faith E. recognizing that a court is not limited in what it may consider in determining whether parental rights should be terminated

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that in determining whether to vacate regulations that violate the apa a court should consider the seriousness of the rules deficiencies and thus the extent of doubt whether the agency chose correctly and the disruptive consequences of an interim change that may itself be changed
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: for attorney’s fees and costs. 1 . As explained below, the court considers plaintiff's "complaint” as a motion to affirm the arbitration award. See 9 U.S.C. § 6 (explaining that applications to vacate an arbitration award must be considered "in the manner provided by the law for the making and hearing of motions”). 2 . One panel member concluded that plaintiff was allowed to transition work because defendant's poor quality and delivery performance constituted a material breach under the SAA. This panel member, however, agreed with the damage analysis set forth in the award if there had been a breach. 3 . The Tenth Circuit still recognizes manifest disregard of the law as a basis for overturning an award. See Abbott v. Law Office of Patrick J. Mulligan, 440 Fed.Appx. 612 (10th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). 4 . Plaintiff also argues that the majority Options: A. recognizing circuit split but declining to jettison the manifest disregard standard absent firm guidance from the supreme court B. recognizing circuit split C. recognizing a split of authority D. recognizing the circuit split and applying the subjective standard as more stringent without deciding which standard applies E. recognizing split

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing circuit split but declining to jettison the manifest disregard standard absent firm guidance from the supreme court
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All obligations and liabilities of Landlord or Tenant to the other which accrued before the expiration or other termination of this Lease and all such obligations and liabilities which by their nature or under the circumstances can only be, or by the provisions of this Lease may be, performed after such expiration or other termination, shall survive the expiration or other termination of this Lease for a period of 3 years. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the rights and obligations of the parties with respect to any indemnity under this Lease, and with respect to Recurring Additional Charges and any other amounts payable under this Lease, shall survive the expiration or other termination of this Lease for a period of 3 years (or for such shorter period of time as may be expressly provided pursuant to the terms of Section 2.08(b) ).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding the termination of the Executive’s employment, or the manner of termination, the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of this Agreement and the Non-Disclosure Agreement shall survive such termination.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: TPC has filed all returns and reports which were required to be filed on or prior to the date hereof, and has paid all Taxes (and any related penalties, fines and interest) which have become due pursuant to such returns or reports or pursuant to any assessment which has become payable, or, to the extent its liability for any Taxes (and any related penalties, fines and interest) has not been fully discharged, the same have been properly reflected as a liability on the books and records of TPC and adequate reserves therefore have been established. All such returns and reports filed on or prior to the date hereof have been properly prepared and arc true, correct (and to the extent such returns reflect judgments made by TPC such judgments were reasonable under the circumstances) and complete in all material respects. No extension for the filing of any such return or report is currently in effect No tax return or tax return liability of TPC has been audited or, presently under audit. All taxes and any penalties. fines and interest which have been asserted to be payable as a result of any audits have been paid. TPC has not given or been requested to give waivers of any statute of limitations relating to the payment of any Taxes (or any related penalties, fines and interest). There are no claims pending for past due Taxes. All payments for withholding taxes, unemployment insurance and other amounts required to be paid for periods prior to the date hereof to any governmental authority in respect of employment obligations of TPC have been paid or shall he paid prior to the Closing and have been duly provided for on the books and records of TPC and in the financial statements of TPC.

assistant: Taxes