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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Each Grantor agrees to pay or reimburse each Secured Party for all its reasonable and documented out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred in collecting against such Grantor under this Agreement or otherwise enforcing or preserving any rights under this Agreement and the other Loan Documents to which such Grantor is a party, including, without limitation, the reasonable and documented fees and disbursements of counsel to each Secured Party and of counsel to the Administrative Agent, in each case, to the extent the Borrower would be required to do so pursuant to Section 11.04 of the Credit Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to cause harm” instead of to restore order. See Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 7, 112 S.Ct. 995, 117 L.Ed.2d 156 (1992); Fillmore v. Page, 358 F.3d 496, 503 (7th Cir.2004). Johnson insists that Moeller struck him six to eight times in the head. But “[w]hen opposing parties tell two different stories, one of which is blatantly contradicted by the record, so that no reasonable jury could believe it, a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment.” Scott, 127 S.Ct. at 1776. No reasonable juror could believe Johnson’s version of events because the security tape shows that after Johnson hit Calloway, Moeller struck him only once in the back with the metal restraints, drove him to the floor, and handcuffed him. See id. (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, Johnson submitted an unsigned Options: A. holding that when a video recording of an alleged excessive force incident contradicts the nonmoving partys version of the incident to the extent that no reasonable jury could believe it a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment B. holding that summary judgment should have been granted because motorists version of facts was utterly discredited by videotape of incident C. holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that a motion for summary judgment was not opposed D. holding that district court should not have granted summary judgment solely on basis that motion for summary judgment was not opposed E. holding that on summary judgment a court should not adopt a version of the facts blatantly contradicted by the record

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that summary judgment should have been granted because motorists version of facts was utterly discredited by videotape of incident
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: not expected to accommodate disabilities of which it is unaware.” Miller, 61 F.3d at 629 (citing 29 C.F.R. app. § 1630.9 (1994)). The “logic of this proposition is overwhelming and has been affirmed repeatedly by other courts construing ... the ADA .... ” Id. at 629-30 (citations omitted). “ ‘The ADA does not require clairvoyance.’ ” Id. at 630 (quoting Hedberg v. Ind. Bell Tel. Co., 47 F.3d 928, 934 (7th Cir.1995)). It would also be difficult to charge Care Initiatives with knowledge of Gretillat’s squatting, crawling, crouching and kneeling limitations in light of the fact that Gretillat’s own doctor informed Care Initiatives twice during the course of Gretillat’s employment that no such restrictions were needed. See, e.g., Alexander v. Northland Inn, 321 F.3d 723, 727 (8th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). For the foregoing reasons, the court shall Options: A. holding that it was not wrong for the administrator to rely on the findings of an independent reviewing physician B. holding physician entitled to recover attorneys fees actually paid by malpractice insurer because physician was personally liable in the first instance C. holding employer was entitled to rely and act upon the written advice from the employees physician D. holding employer justified in relying upon plaintiffs physician E. holding that the trial court was entitled to rely upon contents of written admonishments and statements in which both defendant and his counsel averred that defendants plea was freely and voluntarily made

assistant: The best answer is C. holding employer was entitled to rely and act upon the written advice from the employees physician
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: 177, 188 (Winter 2008) (“[T]here is not one consistent legitimate special circumstance that warrants release on bail.”). Multiple factors have led to this convoluted “special circumstances” standard. See Kelly, Bail in International Extraditions, supra, at 36-37. First, as discussed above, there is no clear authority on the issue of bail in international extradition proceedings. Second, it is not uncommon for defense attorneys to present a myriad of special circumstances in support of their client’s bail application. See, e.g., Nina Marino & Nicole Eiland, Defending International Extradition, 22 Crim. Just. 4, 7 (Winter 2008) (suggesting that the “best way to secure release pending the extradition proceedings is to throw in the proverbial kitchen sink”); Ramnath, 533 F.Supp.2d at 671 (<HOLDING>). This tactic results in courts considering, Options: A. holding failure to file statement of points is no bar to appeal B. holding statement of points in notice of appeal sufficient C. holding courts do not consider points not raised in briefs D. recognizing that respondents counsel strains too hard with specious arguments and summarily rejecting these patently gilded points E. holding that assessment of victim injury points was improper because the information did not allege the factual basis for the victim injury points

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that respondents counsel strains too hard with specious arguments and summarily rejecting these patently gilded points
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 submitting , posting or displaying content on or through the services , you grant us a worldwide , non-exclusive , royalty-free license ( with the right to sublicense ) to use , copy , reproduce , process , adapt , modify , publish , transmit , display and distribute such content in any and all media or distribution methods ( now known or later developed ) .

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: All of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of the Company and the Company's ownership interests therein are set forth on Schedule 3.1(a) . The Company owns, directly or indirectly, all of the capital stock or other equity interests of each Subsidiary free and clear of any Liens, and all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of each Subsidiary are validly issued and are fully paid, non-assessable and free of preemptive and similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS EIGHTH AMENDMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REGARD TO ANY CHOICE-OF-LAW PROVISIONS THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE APPLICATION OF THE LAW OF ANOTHER JURISDICTION.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of its common-law claims as it may recover under its CERCLA claims. 42 U.S.C. 9614(b); Coppola, 935 F.Supp.2d at 1012 ("CERCLA prohibits a person from recovering compensation for the same removal costs or damages or claims pursuant to other state or federal law.” (citation omitted).) Because the court cannot determine at this stage in the litigation whether plaintiff will ultimately prevail on its CERCLA claims, or whether it seeks to recover the same costs under its state-law claims as its CERCLA claims, the court will permit plaintiff to plead both its CERCLA and state-law claims. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(d)(3) ("A party may state as may separate claims ... as it has, regardless of consistency.”); cf. Santa Clara Valley Water Dist. v. Olin Corp., 655 F.Supp.2d 1066, 1079-80 (N.D.Cal.2009) (<HOLDING>) 6 . Moving defendants also cite several cases Options: A. recognizing authority stating that a plaintiff in a cercla action is allowed to plead alternative theories even if it cannot ultimately seek duplicate recovery B. recognizing cercla successor liability C. holding that the failure to plead a particular legal theory when the plaintiff pled two related legal theories was not a bar to recovery D. holding that separate theories of recovery all constituted a medicalmalpractice claim E. holding a shareholders derivative action even where the only relief allowed is a recovery of damages is nevertheless a suit in equity and not an action at law

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing authority stating that a plaintiff in a cercla action is allowed to plead alternative theories even if it cannot ultimately seek duplicate recovery
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 Plaintiff to amend its Complaint to bring its declaratory action under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act. IV. CONCLUSION IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. # 18) is hereby DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint to bring its declaratory action under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Order. 1 . The cases Defendant relies on to support its assertion that the administrative process is Plaintiff's sole remedy all involve an employee bringing a private cause of action related to the administration of his or her workers' compensation claim. See Torre v. J.C. Penney Co., Inc., 916 F.Supp. 1029, 1031 (D.Nev.1996) (<HOLDING>); Madera v. State Indus. Ins. Sys., 114 Nev. Options: A. holding that a bad faith claim is a tort B. holding the bad faith rationale inapplicable given that the defendants acted in good faith in appealing the case and in raising defenses to the plaintiffs claims C. holding that bad faith handling of an insureds claim fell within the act D. holding 616d030 barred employees action where employee alleged the insurance carrier acted in bad faith in handling the claim E. holding 616d030 barred employees actions where employees sued the state industrial insurance system alleging bad faith administration of their workers compensation claims

assistant: The best answer is D. holding 616d030 barred employees action where employee alleged the insurance carrier acted in bad faith in handling the claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a transaction involving commerce” if it in fact turns out to involve interstate commerce. Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265, 277, 115 S.Ct. 834, 841, 130 L.Ed.2d 753 (1995). The assets transferred to Bryce Interests by Velma and the Bank, as trustee of the marital trust, included the Fredonia stock and other securities. The Bank, as agent and attorney in fact for Bryce Interests under the terms of the investment account agreement, traded the Fredonia stock, as well as some of the other transferred securities, on national exchanges such as NASDAQ and the New York Stock E 5, 127-28 (Tex.1999) (same); see also Provision Interactive Techs., Inc. v. Betacorp Mgmt., Inc., No. 03-06-00692-CV, 2008 WL 536688, at * 3 (Tex.App.-Austin Feb.28, 2008, no pet.) (mem.op.) (<HOLDING>). ■ It is uncontroverted that the agreement is Options: A. holding that both faa and taa applied where contracts stated they shall be governed by the law of the place where the project is located B. holding that the faa mandates courts to direct parties to arbitration on issues to which a valid arbitration agreement has been signed C. holding that the faa requires arbitration of age discrimination claims when a valid arbitration agreement exists D. holding that agreement to employ arbitration organized under the statutes or the courts of the states in which the complaining party is domiciled invokes both faa and taa E. holding that faa was inapplicable where parties involved in action are not parties to an arbitration agreement under which issues are referable to arbitration

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that agreement to employ arbitration organized under the statutes or the courts of the states in which the complaining party is domiciled invokes both faa and taa
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 determining what constitutes a comment on post-arrest silence is fairly liberal. “If the comment is fairly susceptible of being construed by the jury as a comment on the defendant’s exercise of his or her right to remain silent, it violates the defendant’s right to silence.” Id. at 769; see also State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129, 1135 (Fla.1986). Thus, “Evidence or argument that is fairly susceptible of being deemed a comment on the right of silence should be excluded.” Giorgetti v. State, 821 So.2d 417, 422 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); see also State v. Smith, 573 So.2d 306, 317 (Fla.1990) (“[Cjourts must prohibit all evidence or argument that is fairly susceptible of being interpreted by the jury as a comment on the right of silence.”); Dixon v. State, 627 So.2d 19, 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993) (<HOLDING>). Here, Detective Kent’s response that Green Options: A. holding that com ments that are fairly susceptible to being interpreted as comments on the defendants silence are generally reversible error B. holding that if comment is fairly susceptible of being construed by the jury as a comment on the defendants exercise of his or her right to remain silent it violates the defendants state constitutional right to silence whether comment was introduced in states caseinchief or for impeachment purposes holding that the state may not impeach a defendant with his postarrest or postmiranda silence C. holding that constructive amendments which are per se reversible under harmless error analysis are also per se reversible under plain error analysis D. holding that comment on defendants silence was not reversible error because inter alia it did not have the effect of being probative on guilt or innocence E. holding under plain error review that prosecutions repeated references to defendants silence in a one day trial were not harmless despite defendants responsive comments on silence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that com ments that are fairly susceptible to being interpreted as comments on the defendants silence are generally reversible error
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James Hampton Williams, II, was convicted by a jury on several counts related to his participation in a large-scale, ten-year long conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, and was sentenced to life in prison. Specifically, Williams was convicted of one count of conspiracy to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and fifty grams or more of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 (2006); one count of conspiracy to launder money, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (2006); one count of cocaine distribution, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) 27 S.Ct. 2456, 2465-66, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Benkahla, 530 F.3d 300, 312 Options: A. holding that if a jury is to be provided the defendant at capital sentencing regardless of whether the sixth amendment requires it the jury must stand impartial and indifferent to the extent commanded by the sixth amendment B. recognizing that its sixth amendment cases do not automatically forbid a sentencing court to take account of factual matters not determined by a jury and to increase the sentence in consequence C. holding that there is no sixth amendment right to jury sentencing D. holding that the fact of a prior conviction for sentencing purposes need not be proved to a jury or admitted by defendant to satisfy the sixth amendment E. holding federal sentencing guidelines are subject to jury trial requirements of sixth amendment

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that its sixth amendment cases do not automatically forbid a sentencing court to take account of factual matters not determined by a jury and to increase the sentence in consequence
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: Should the Closing occur, the remedies provided for in this ARTICLE IX shall be the sole and exclusive remedies of any Indemnified Party in respect of Losses arising out of this Agreement, the Ancillary Agreements, the Purchased Assets, the Excluded Assets, the Assumed Liabilities, the Excluded Liabilities or the transactions contemplated hereby or by the Ancillary Agreements, other than (i) for actions for specific performance or other equitable remedies or (ii) for claims against a party arising out of the intentional fraud of such party. In furtherance of the foregoing, each party hereby waives (on behalf of itself and the relevant Indemnified Parties) any provision of applicable law to the extent that it would limit or restrict the agreement contained in this Section 9.06 , and each party hereby waives (on behalf of itself and the relevant Indemnified Parties) for periods following the Closing any and all other rights, claims or causes of action it or its affiliates or relevant Indemnified Parties may have against the other party or its affiliates or representatives now or in the future arising under or based upon this Agreement, any Ancillary Agreement, any document or certificate delivered in connection herewith, other than the remedies provided in this ARTICLE IX or contained in any Ancillary Agreement.

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: As of the Closing Date, all information (other than the Base Case Projections and any report of an Independent Consultant) heretofore or contemporaneously furnished to Administrative Agent by or on behalf of an Obligor (but only where Obligor has knowledge of such disclosure) in connection with any Credit Document or any transaction contemplated hereby, taken together as a whole with all other information with which Administrative Agent has previously been furnished by or on behalf of an Obligor (but only where an Obligor has knowledge of such disclosure) is complete and correct in all material respects as of the date such information was furnished and as of the Closing Date, and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary to make any information not materially misleading in light of the circumstances under which furnished. As of the Closing Date, the Base Case Projections have been prepared in good faith based upon assumptions believed by Borrower to be reasonable at the time made and at the time so furnished, it being understood that the Base Case Projections are not to be viewed as facts and are subject to uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond the control of Borrower, that no assurance can be given that the Base Case Projections will be realized, that actual results may differ and such differences may be material.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Priority Lien Agent and the Second Lien Agent represents and warrants to the other parties hereto that it is authorized under the Priority Credit Agreement and the Second Lien Indenture, as the case may be, to enter into this Agreement.

assistant: Representations
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 in the SEC Documents or as set forth on Schedule 4.9 , there are no actions, suits, investigations, inquiries or proceedings pending or, to the knowledge of the Company, threatened against or affecting the Company or any of its properties, nor has the Company received any written or oral notice of any such action, suit, proceeding, inquiry or investigation, which would have a Material Adverse Effect. No judgment, order, writ, injunction or decree or award has been issued by or, to the knowledge of the Company, requested of any court, arbitrator or governmental agency which would have a Material Adverse Effect. There has not been, and to the knowledge of the Company, there is not pending or contemplated, any investigation by the SEC involving the Company or any current or former director or officer of the Company.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: class-of-one theory is not legally cognizable where ... a public employee claims that she has been treated differently than other employees.”); Duprey v. Twelfth Judicial Dist. Court, No. CIV 08-0756 JB, 2009 WL 2105955, at *5 (D.N.M. June 22, 2009) (Browning, J.)(“In this case, Duprey, who is a public employee, is alleging that she was denied a promotion and was demoted. Because her lawsuit arises in the public-employee context, she cannot proceed on the class-of-one theory.”). Moreover, in these class-of-one claims, where discrimination is not alleged against a class of persons, “[t]he allegation that a plaintiff was treated differently from those similarly situated is an essential element of an equal protection action.” Hennigh v. City of Shawnee, 155 F.3d 1249, 1257 (10th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>)(citing Norton v. Vill. of Corrales, 103 F.3d Options: A. holding that a plaintiff who did not show that he was paid at a lower rate than similarly situated employees could not survive summary judgment B. holding that to assert a viable equal protection claim plaintiffs must first make a threshold showing that they were differently treated from others who were similarly situated to them C. holding that the plaintiff who alleged he was subjected to discipline and a disciplinary proceeding not applicable to any other police officer under the collective bargaining agreement but not alleging any classbased discrimination failed to state a claim as the plaintiff did not show how he was treated differently from others similarly situated emphasis added D. holding that caucasian employees who engaged in the same act as the plaintiff but it did not result in injury to others were not similarly situated E. holding that black residents failed to state an equal protection claim where they did not allege the existence of a similarly situated group of white residents who were treated differently

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the plaintiff who alleged he was subjected to discipline and a disciplinary proceeding not applicable to any other police officer under the collective bargaining agreement but not alleging any classbased discrimination failed to state a claim as the plaintiff did not show how he was treated differently from others similarly situated emphasis added
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: Medina points to a comment by District Manager Juan Mercado in which Mercado said to Medina that Medina was “big, fat, and strong,, but yet so messed up.” Plaintiffs Statement pf Contested Facts at 2. Thése isolated comments fail even to approach evidence of discriminatory animus. Even if these statements could be reasonably construed as discriminatory, though, “isolated or ambiguous remarks, tending to suggest animus ..., are insufficient, standing alone, to prove an employer’s discriminatory intent.” Speen v. Crown Clothing Corp., 102 F.3d 625, 636 (1st Cir.1996) (interpreting state age discrimination law and quoting Blare v. Husky Injection Molding Sys., 419 Mass. 437, 646 N.E.2d 111, 118, n. 9 (1995)). See also Lehman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 74 F.3d 323, 329 (1st Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Gagne v. Northwestern Nat’l Ins. Co., 881 Options: A. holding that isolated remarks are insufficient to prove discriminatory intent B. recognizing that the seventh circuit consistently has held that isolated comments that are no more than stray remarks in the work place are insufficient to establish that a particular decision was motivated by discriminatory animus C. holding that ambiguous remarks tending to suggest animus based on age are insufficient standing alone to prove an employers discriminatory intent D. holding causal link between alleged discriminatory remarks and adverse employment action insufficient E. holding failure to promote was an isolated incident of discrimination which is insufficient to prove a continuing violation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that isolated remarks are insufficient to prove discriminatory intent
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: dard or limitation that Esso is allegedly violating under CWA. The CWA provides that a civil action may be brought against anyone “alleged to be in violation of [¶]... ] an effluent standard or limitation of this chapter.” See 33 USC 1365(a)(1). Effluent standard or limitation is d ed in the interior of the island constitutes water in the territorial seas. See United States v. Appalachian Electric Power Co., 311 U.S. 377, 61 S.Ct. 291, 85 L.Ed. 243 (1941) (a body of water is “a navigable water of the United States” if (1) it presently, or (2) has been or was in the past, or (3) could be made in the future by reasonable improvements, susceptible for use in interstate or foreign commerce.), but see Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Callaway, 392 F.Supp. 685, 686 (D.D.C.1975) (<HOLDING>); Rivera Torres, 826 F.2d at 154-55 (citing Options: A. holding that the plaintiff must demonstrate that defendants contacts with the united states as a whole support the exercise of jurisdiction consistent with the constitution and laws of the united states B. holding that wetlands adjacent to navigable waters are included in the term territorial waters C. holding that as used in the cwa the term waters of the united states is not limited to the traditional tests of navigability D. holding that the land under navigable waters was not granted by the constitution to the united states but was reserved to the states respectively and that new states have the same rights jurisdiction and sovereignty over the soil under navigable water as the original states E. holding that the term includes in the cwa allows for additional unstated meanings

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that as used in the cwa the term waters of the united states is not limited to the traditional tests of navigability
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, demands, requests, consents, approvals and other communications required or permitted hereunder ( “Notices” ) shall be given in accordance with Section 14.6 of the Loan Agreement to the addresses listed below.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you reside outside of the united states , canada and brazil , then the other party to this contract is evernote gmbh , a company headquartered in zurich , switzerland .

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: The headings set forth herein are for convenience of reference only and shall not be considered to limit or amplify the terms and provisions hereof, nor shall they be examined or referred to in construing or interpreting this Agreement.

assistant: Headings
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: this does not affect our liability for death or personal injury arising from our negligence , or our liability for fraudulent misrepresentation or misrepresentation as to a fundamental matter , or any other liability which can not be excluded or limited under applicable law .

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: gang affiliation, and vehicle information add little to the Cl’s reliability.” Second, the district court found that the facts that were corroborated were “easily obtained” and thus inadequate to bolster the Cl’s credibility. Third, the district court stated that because the controlled buy was unsuccessful, “the Cl’s information concerning drug activity at the residence was never sufficiently corroborated.” Accordingly, the district court concluded that the search warrant was not supported by probable cause. The state contends that the district court erroneously minimized or discounted the value of the corroborative facts. We agree. Even corroboration of minor details lends credence to an informant’s tip and is relevant to the probable-cause determination. See Wiley, 366 N.W.2d at 269 (<HOLDING>); McCloskey, 453 N.W.2d at 701, 704 (finding Options: A. holding an informants tip can establish reasonable suspicion without investigative confirmation if the tip is credible B. holding corroboration is not a necessity where confidential informants reliability was well established and his tip was based on direct personal observation of criminal activity C. holding a trial court did not abuse its discretion by failing to require disclosure of an informants name D. recognizing that although not a key detail corroboration of defendants name residence and make of vehicle lent credence to informants tip E. holding corroboration of named informants statements some of which included suspects hearsay enhanced informants reliability

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that although not a key detail corroboration of defendants name residence and make of vehicle lent credence to informants tip
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: home from the adjoining lot and to contact the fire department if they saw any indication of fire. It was undisputed that the guards had permission to enter the property adjoining the Clarks’ land and that they were not authorized to enter th elves and did not attempt to do so, so shooting the dog could not have been done to prevent the dog from revealing the guards’ presence. Oklahoma courts have repeatedly endorsed the general rule that an agent’s tortious or criminal assault on a third party cannot be considered within the scope of the agent’s authority, unless the assault could have been “anticipated by the employer” as a foreseeable means of accomplishing the job for which the agent was employed. See, e.g., Allison v. Gilmore, Gardner & Kirk, Inc., 350 P.2d 287, 290-92 (Okla.1960) (<HOLDING>); Tulsa General, 288 P.2d at 753 (holding that Options: A. holding county employee with unenforceable contract was atwill employee B. holding that where employee gave notice to employer of injury and employer told employee that nothing could be done for him through workmans compensation employer had breached statute and was liable for medical treatment which was reasonable and necessary to restore employee to maximum usefulness C. holding injured employee who asked his employer for medical assistance and employer refused and employee then went to physician of his own choice employee could recover medical benefits D. holding that employer was not liable when employee got into a fight with a third party who challenged the way the employee was doing his job E. holding that employee was not precluded from bringing separate employment discrimination action against employer where employee was not a party to consent decree entered into between eeoc and employer employee had rejected consent decree and had received no relief under decree

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that employer was not liable when employee got into a fight with a third party who challenged the way the employee was doing his job
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of the Plan is, becomes or is deemed to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Plan shall not be affected thereby.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Loan Parties shall have delivered to the Lender such intellectual property security documents and other documents as the Lender may require to permit the Lender to record its security interest in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the United States Copyright Office, or with any other United States Governmental Authority as may be necessary to perfect and protect the Lender’s security interest in such intellectual property Collateral.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: with respect to content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of yahoo groups , the license to use , distribute , reproduce , modify , adapt , publicly perform and publicly display such content on the yahoo services solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the specific yahoo group to which such content was submitted or made available .

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: Subject to the terms of Section 17 of the Plan, any amendment to the Plan shall be deemed to be an amendment to this Agreement to the extent that the amendment is applicable hereto; provided, however, that no amendment will adversely affect the rights of the Grantee under this Agreement without the Grantee’s consent.

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: Serv. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 834-35, 96 S.Ct. 1961, 1968-69, 48 L.Ed.2d 402 (1976) (“We have consistently held that a narrowly tailored employee compensation scheme pre-empts the more general tort recovery statutes.”). The court in Atkinson further reasoned that the statutory penalty “inferentially, but nonetheless plainly, also provides that the penalty shall not be any different amount, and that liability for it shall not vary according to anything, such as good or bad faith....” Atkinson, 838 F.2d at 812; see also Hall v. C & P Tel. Co., 809 F.2d 924 (D.C.Cir.1987) (finding state tort claim based on employer’s intentional refusal to make timely compensation payments preempted by exclusivity and late payment provisions of LHWCA); Sample v. Johnson, 771 F.2d 1335, 1347 (9th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1019, 106 S.Ct. 1206, Options: A. holding that failure to pay obligations under a contract is a material breach as a matter of law when parties explicitly state in the contract that failure to pay warrants termination B. holding state wrongful refusal to pay claim barred by exclusivity and penalty provisions of lhwca and distinguishing martin from cases of ordinary refusals to pay C. holding that ordinary businesses do not pay fictitious profits D. holding that exclusivity provision of workers compensation act barred wifes loss of consortium claim E. holding statute of limitations for discriminatory pay practices begins when initial pay decision was made

assistant: The best answer is B. holding state wrongful refusal to pay claim barred by exclusivity and penalty provisions of lhwca and distinguishing martin from cases of ordinary refusals to pay
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: immunity defense ordinarily fails, since “a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his conduct.” See id. (quoting Harlow, 457 U.S. at 818-19, 102 S.Ct. 2727). Thus, the aldermen are entitled to qualified immunity only if Belk’s right to free speech was not clearly established at the time of her discharge. See id. Belk was discharged in 1995. As early as 1985, the Supreme Court had found a clear First Amendment protection for public employees. “It is clearly established that a State may not discharge an employee on a basis that infringes that employee’s constitutionally protected interest in freedom of speech.” Rankin, 483 U.S. at 382, 107 S.Ct. 2891. Our own precedent evidences this principle as well. See Hafley v. Lohman, 90 F.3d 264, 267 (8th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Casey, 12 F.3d at 804 (“No right is more Options: A. holding that retaliatory discharge based solely on protected speech by ones spouse is actionable under the first amendment B. recognizing retaliatory discharge tort implied by the workers compensation act C. holding that it is clearly established that retaliation against private citizens for exercising their first amendment rights is actionable D. recognizing the tort of retaliatory discharge E. holding that retaliatory discharge is a clearly established first amendment violation

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that retaliatory discharge is a clearly established first amendment violation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable, this Agreement shall be considered divisible and such provision shall be deemed inoperative to the extent it is deemed unenforceable, and in all other respects this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect; provided, however , that if any provision may be made enforceable by limitation thereof, then such provision shall be deemed to be so limited and shall be enforceable to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to argue on appeal his waiver and sua sponte dismissal issues, we should then reject the petitioner’s arguments on the merits. In my judgment, the district court acted in conformity not only with AEDPA but also with the caselaw construing AED-PA. Congress intended AEDPA to further the principles of comity, finality, and federalism. Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 420, 436, 120 S.Ct. 1479, 146 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) (stating that “there is no doubt Congress intended AEDPA to advance these doctrines [comity, finality, and federalism]”). Consistent with such purpose, Congress created a one-year limitations period that was meant to streamline the habeas review process and to lend finality to state court convictions. Duncan v. Walker, 533 U.S. 167, 121 S.Ct. 2120, 2128, 150 L.Ed.2d 251 (2001) (<HOLDING>); see also H.R. Cong. Rep. No. 104-518, at 111 Options: A. recognizing that exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of statute serves as only effective deterrent of such violations B. recognizing as well that such uninhibited communication serves the public interest by facilitating the administration of appropriate treatment C. recognizing that the 1 year limitation period of 2244d1 quite plainly serves the wellrecognized interest in the finality of state court judgments D. holding that appellate court may raise issues of default sua sponte where necessary to protect inter alia the finality of federal criminal judgments E. holding constitutional a statute providing that a mineral interest would lapse to the surface owner if the interest owner either made no use of the interest or failed to file a claim with the state within a twenty year period

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that the 1 year limitation period of 2244d1 quite plainly serves the wellrecognized interest in the finality of state court judgments
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: Neither execution nor delivery of this Agreement nor fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and provisions hereof will conflict with, or result in a breach of the terms or conditions of, or constitute a default under, any agreement or instrument to which any Borrower is a party or by which any Borrower may be bound. No consents, approvals or authorizations are required for the execution and delivery of this Agreement by any Borrower or for any Borrower’s compliance with its terms and provisions.

assistant: No Conflicts
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 “sums due in connection with equipment and materials furnished and workmen employed in the construction of the M/V Gulf Tiger.” Complaint at ¶¶ 9-10. Gulf Fleet alleges that it has a privilege under article 3237(8) because it paid the vendors who supplied the materials, equipment, and labor to the construction of the vessel. Thoma-Sea contends that mere payment of vendors does not give rise to a privilege in favor of Gulf Fleet under article 3237(8) because the privilege is limited to suppliers who actually furnish materials to a vessel, or to laborers employed in the construction of the vessel. The scope of the article 3237(8) privilege is a question of law that is appropriate for a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. Louisiana state law privileges are stricti juris; they cannot be a.1860) (<HOLDING>); Hill v. Phoenix Tow, 2 Rob. (LA) 35, 1842 WL Options: A. holding the limitation fund liability of a defendant shipowner may be increased to include his interest in the value of all vessels engaged in a common enterprise or venture with the vessel aboard which the loss or injury was sustained B. holding a contract clause stating that the yard shall in no case be held responsible for the damages resulting from any loss of use or profit of the vessel to be unambiguous C. holding that a party who lends money to be used in the repairs of a vessel or to furnish the vessel with supplies does not have a privilege against the vessel D. holding that a creditor for advances or loans in money made to the owner and applied to the use of a vessel has no privilege allowed him by law because he is not subrogated to the rights of those whose privileged claims have been paid out of the money loaned E. holding that a houseboat is a vessel capable of being subject to a maritime lien as the fact that she has no motive power and must be towed does not deprive her of the status of a vessel

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a party who lends money to be used in the repairs of a vessel or to furnish the vessel with supplies does not have a privilege against the vessel
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 for Section 3.3, this Agreement shall terminate on the earlier to occur of (i) such time as the Blackstone Designator is no longer entitled to designate a Director pursuant to Section 2.1(a) and (ii) the delivery of a written notice by the Blackstone Designator to the Company requesting that this Agreement terminate. The VCOC Investors shall advise the Company when they collectively first cease to Beneficially Own any of the Company’s Common Stock or other securities of the Company into which such shares of Common Stock may be converted or for which such shares of Common Stock may be exchanged, whereupon Section 3.3 hereof shall terminate.

assistant: Terminations