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: out-of-state marriage recognized in other states (i.e. Texas). In dealing with the issue of out-of-state same-sex marriage recognition, the Supreme Court in Windsor held that by treating state-sanctioned same-sex married couples differently than state-sanctioned opposite-sex married couples, Section 3 of DOMA violated basic due process principles applicable to the federal government. 133 S.Ct. at 2693. In this case, the Court must decide whether a state can do what the federal government cannot — discriminate against state-sanctioned same-sex couples and deny them the benefits conferred by marriage. The Court in Windsor did not clarify whether out-of-state marriage recognition implicated a fundamental right, but held that it was a right protected under the Constitution. See id. at 2696 (<HOLDING>). Therefore, in reviewing Plaintiffs’ due Options: A. holding that entitlement to benefits is a property interest protected by the due process clause of the fifth amendment to the united states constitution B. holding the same with respect to violations of the fifth amendment C. holding doma was unconstitutional as a deprivation of liberty of the person protected by the fifth amendment D. holding that the statement ill take the fifth was an assertion of the fifth amendment privilege E. holding that merely declining to rehire a person did not constitute defamation for deprivation of liberty interest purposes absent any charges against the good name or reputation of that person

assistant: The best answer is C. holding doma was unconstitutional as a deprivation of liberty of the person protected by the fifth amendment
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was not bound by this ruling when he rendered this decision in 1999 because SSR 00-4p was not effective until December 2000. Perhaps as a result, Money mentions SSR 00-4p on appeal but concedes that we do not need to apply it here. She argues persuasively that this court has endorsed reconciling conflicts between VEs’ testimony and the DOT definitions even in claims not governed by SSR 00-4p. See Burns v. Barnhart, 312 F.3d 113, 126-27 (3d Cir.2002). We do not need to decide this question, though, because the district court’s decision to affirm stands even if such reconciliation was needed. Money apparently did not raise the first issue regarding the error in step four to the district court, and it is therefore waived. See Gass v. V.I. Telephone Corp., 311 F.3d 237, 246 (3d Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Looking at this issue on the merits, this Options: A. holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be raised for the first time before this court B. holding issues not raised before local agency are waived C. holding that issues not raised before the trial court cannot be raised on appeal D. holding that issues not raised before a district court are waived on appeal E. holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be asserted for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that issues not raised before a district court are waived on appeal
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 opposed to a municipality: Although the district court found that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Roane County had a policy or custom of deliberately ignoring prisoners’ medical needs, that finding is not on appeal. See Meals [v. City of Memphis], 493 F.3d [720], 727 [ (6th Cir.2007) ] (a city is not entitled to appeal the district court’s denial of summary judgment on an interlocutory appeal). The Estate’s general allegations that the correctional officers and paramedics were not properly trained are more appropriately submitted as evidence to support a failure-to-train theory against the municipality itself, and not the supervisors in their individual capacities. See City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 385, 109 S.Ct. 1197, 103 L.Ed.2d 412 (1989) (<HOLDING>). While an individual supervisor may still be Options: A. recognizing that a systematic failure to train officers adequately as a custom or policy may lead to city liability B. holding that a municipality may only be held liable under 1983 for a policy practice or custom C. holding that a failure to adequately train will only result in 1983 liability where that failure amounts to a deliberate indifference to the rights of persons with whom the police come into contact D. holding that a city may be held liable on account of the unconstitutional conduct of city officials only if the citys policy or custom played a part in the violation E. holding city may be liable for the failure to train officers regarding appropriate assistance and treatment of intoxicated persons

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that a systematic failure to train officers adequately as a custom or policy may lead to city liability
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 specifically disclosed in Schedule 5.06, there are no actions, suits, investigations or legal, equitable, arbitration or administrative proceedings pending or, to the knowledge of any Loan Party, threatened against or affecting any Group Company in which there is a reasonable possibility of an adverse decision and, if adversely determined, could reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In view of the irreparable harm and damage which would occur to the Company and its Affiliates as a result of a breach or a threatened breach by Associate of the obligations set forth in Sections 10(a)-(d) of this Agreement, and in view of the lack of an adequate remedy at law to protect the Company and its Affiliates , the Company or its applicable Affiliates shall have the right to receive, and Associate hereby consents to the issuance of, temporary and permanent injunctions enjoining Associate from any violation of Sections 10(a)-(d) hereof. Associate acknowledges that both temporary and permanent injunctions are appropriate remedies for such a breach or threatened breach. The foregoing remedies shall be in addition to, and not in limitation of, any other rights or remedies to which the Company and its Affiliates are or may be entitled hereunder or at law or in equity, including, without limitation, the right to right to receive damages.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the full and entire understanding and agreement among the parties with regard to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, and representations, whether oral or written, of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. There are no restrictions, agreements, promises, representations, warranties, covenants or undertakings, oral or written, between the parties other than those expressly set forth herein.

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: exist, the defendant must establish the following: “(1) the State possessed evidence favorable to the accused because it was either exculpatory or impeaching; (2) the State willfully or inadvertently suppressed the evidence; and (3) the defendant was prejudiced.” Allen v. State, 854 So.2d 1255, 1259 (Fla.2003). Prejudice exists if the suppressed evidence was material. See id. at 1260. Finally, evidence is material if a reasonable probability exists that disclosure of the suppressed evidence would have led to a different result at the proceeding. See Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 280, 119 S.Ct. 1936, 144 L.Ed.2d 286 (1999); Strickland, 466 U.S. at 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052. The claim based on notes from police brainstorming sessions is clearly without merit. Overton was provided the Rou (<HOLDING>). During the evidentiary hearing, it was Options: A. holding that the defendant insufficiently pled the brady claim because he failed to assert how the evidence was material or how he was prejudiced by the states nondisclo sure B. holding that the information contained in the police files with regard to other possible suspects was not brady material C. holding that the brady claim was insufficiently pled in the rule 3851 motion because the defendant presented no factual basis that the disputed item ever existed or contained exculpatory information D. holding that record must show that evidence is exculpatory for defendant to establish brady violation E. holding that there was no brady violation because the exculpatory effect of the disputed documents was merely speculative

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the brady claim was insufficiently pled in the rule 3851 motion because the defendant presented no factual basis that the disputed item ever existed or contained exculpatory information
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 term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of one (1) year unless earlier terminated as provided herein (“ Initial Term ”). Contemporaneous with the expiration of the Initial Term, the Agreement shall renew automatically for consecutive one (1)-year terms until terminated as provided herein (each a “Renewal Term ,” and together with the Initial Term, the “Term ”).

assistant: Terms
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 hold that 25 U.S.C. § 410 continues to protect any money accruing from the lease of Indian trust land, even after it has been distributed to a Native American and placed in a personal bank account. 1. Jurisdiction ¶14 “Where a federal statute is silent on the question of jurisdiction, state and federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction.” Law Offices of Vincent Vitale, PC v. Tabbytite, 942 P.2d 1141, 1147 (Alaska 1997) (citing Charles Dowd Box Co. v. Courtney, 368 U.S. 502, 506-08, 82 S. Ct. 519, 7 L. Ed. 2d 483 (1962)). Because 25 U.S.C. § 410 does not purport to impose exclusive federal jurisdiction, Washington courts have subject matter jurisdiction to determine whether 25 U.S.C. § 410 bars garnishment of the funds in the Harrisons’ bank accounts. See Vitale, 942 P.2d at 1147 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the trial court had jurisdiction Options: A. holding that a nevada state court had no jurisdiction to entertain a civil action filed by a nonindian against an indian for events that occurred on indian land B. holding that a nevada state court had no jurisdiction over indian claims to land allotments C. holding that alaska state courts had jurisdiction to determine application of 25 usc 410 to proceeds of condemnation action on indian trust land D. holding that the arrest of an indian on indian land was illegal because the state had no jurisdiction over the reservation to enforce its laws including the execution of a search warrant unless congress consented to the states jurisdiction E. holding that county law enforcement officers lacked jurisdiction to arrest indian at ballpark located on indian trust land

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that alaska state courts had jurisdiction to determine application of 25 usc 410 to proceeds of condemnation action on indian trust land
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: unconscionable because it was intertwined with a provision prohibiting the arbitrator from awarding punitive damages. Id. at 355. Importantly, the Abner court found that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable because the arbitration clause itself imposed a limitation on damages that deprived one of the parties of their substantive statutory remedies. Id. But Abner does not stand for the proposition that all arbitration agreements are unenforceable simply because the contract contains a separate and unconscionable provision. Rather, as sub sequent courts construing Abner have emphasized, the question is whether the arbitration clause is so intertwined with the unconscionable provision that the two clauses cannot be severed from each other. See Francis, 2011 WL 2174348 at *3-4 (<HOLDING>). In Abner, the arbitration clause itself Options: A. holding that an arbitration clause was not unconscionable because it did not unreasonably favor the defendants B. holding arbitration clause in credit card agreement unconscionable C. holding that arbitration agreement was not unconscionable where agree ment did not limit punitive damages and limitation of liability provision was severable if unenforceable D. holding that an arbitration clause is valid despite an accompanying limitation on liability because the latter is severable in the event it is found unconscionable E. holding an entire arbitration clause is void and arbitration cannot be compelled where contract contained unconscionable clause and has a nonseverability clause

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an arbitration clause is valid despite an accompanying limitation on liability because the latter is severable in the event it is found unconscionable
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the bus’s lower luggage compartment constituted a seizure, we then could hold the district court did not commit clear error in finding Loos’s and Escobar’s consents to search did not purge the taint of the unlawful seizure. Such a holding is more faithful to the district court’s decision and the parties’ arguments on appeal. Deciding consent cases is a fact-intensive exercise, requiring district courts to “careful[ly] sift[ ] misrepresentation of legal authority and a misunderstanding of legal authority,” the district court was not clearly erroneous in finding Loos’s and Escobar’s consents to search, in light of the lie about the drug dog alerting, were insufficient to overcome the taint of an unlawful seizure. See United States v. Allison, 619 F.2d 1254, 1262, 1264 (8th Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted). Because I would be Options: A. holding that it was unreasonable to believe that womans boyfriend had authority to consent to the search of her purse even though he had authority to consent to the search of the car in which it was kept B. holding that the question of whether police had a reasonable basis for finding that a third party had authority to consent to search is a question of law C. holding threat to obtain a search warrant if individual does not consent to a search is just one factor in deciding whether the totality of the circumstances supports a voluntary consent finding D. holding a search pursuant to the service of a subpoena duces tecum as in normal consent search situations involves a question of fact to be determined from the totality of all the circumstances and recognizing a vast difference between a misrepresentation of legal authority and a misunderstanding of legal authority E. holding that whether a consent to a search was in fact voluntary or was the product of duress or coercion express or implied is a question of fact to be determined from the totality of all the circumstances

assistant: The best answer is D. holding a search pursuant to the service of a subpoena duces tecum as in normal consent search situations involves a question of fact to be determined from the totality of all the circumstances and recognizing a vast difference between a misrepresentation of legal authority and a misunderstanding of legal authority
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: attacks. See Williams, 480 Fed.Appx. at 256 (“A prison guard is deliberately indifferent if he intentionally denies or delays access to medical care.” (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Walker v. Butler, 967 F.2d 176, 178 (5th Cir.1992))). Moreover, the parties agree that Stewart’s medical condition was known by the prison guards. Our review of the summary judgment evidence indicates that Appellees also intentionally disregarded the established treatment plan for Stewart. See Chapman v. Johnson, 339 Fed.Appx. 446, 448 (5th Cir.2009) (per curiam) (unpublished) (stating that a defendant is not entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity when the defendant knew of prisoner’s injury and treatment protocol but failed to follow it); see also Easter, 467 F.3d at 465 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the district court erred when it Options: A. holding that summary judgment was improper on qualified immunity grounds when defendant was aware of prisoners need for medical treatment but failed to provide it B. holding that summary judgment in favor of the defendant was appropriate because the plaintiff failed to designate evidence that demonstrates that the defendant abused the qualified privilege C. holding that it was error for the district court to overrule appellants motion for summary judgment without reference to the qualified immunity defense D. holding that summary judgment for defendant officials on the basis of qualified immunity was improper given officials indefinite refusal to treat plaintiffs cavity E. holding that an interlocutory appeal lies from a denial of summary judgment on a qualified immunity claim

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that summary judgment was improper on qualified immunity grounds when defendant was aware of prisoners need for medical treatment but failed to provide it
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the fullest extent it may effectively do so under applicable law, (a) each of the parties hereto hereby irrevocably and unconditionally submits, for itself and its Property, to the exclusive jurisdiction of any New York state court or federal court sitting in New York City, and any appellate court from any appeal thereof, in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement, any of the Notes, or any other instrument or document furnished pursuant hereto or in connection herewith or for recognition or enforcement of any judgment, and each of the parties hereto hereby irrevocably and unconditionally agrees that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding may be heard and determined in any such court; (b) each of the parties hereto hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives the defense of an inconvenient forum to the maintenance of such action or proceeding and any objection that it may now or hereafter have to the laying of venue of any such action or proceeding in any such court; (c) the Borrower hereby agrees that service of copies of the summons and complaint and any other process which may be served in any such action or proceeding may be made by mailing or delivering a copy of such process to the Borrower at its address specified in Section 8.02; and (d) each of the parties hereto agrees that a final judgment in any such action or proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law. Nothing herein shall affect the rights of any Bank or the Agent to serve legal process in any other manner permitted by law. Each of the Borrower, the Agent and the Banks and each of their respective directors, officers, employees, Affiliates, advisors and agents hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives, to the fullest extent it may effectively do so under applicable law, any right it may have to claim or recover in any action or proceeding referred to in this Section 8.13 any special, indirect, consequential, punitive, treble or exemplary damages; provided that nothing in this Section 8.13 shall limit the Borrower’s indemnification obligations to the extent such special, indirect, consequential, punitive, treble or exemplary damages are included in any third party claim in connection with which an Indemnified Person is entitled to indemnification hereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of Borrower Parties, as to itself and all of its heirs, successors and assigns only, remises, releases, acquits, satisfies and forever discharges Lender Parties from any and all manner of debts, accountings, bonds, warranties, representations, covenants, promises, contracts, controversies, agreements, liabilities, obligations, expenses, damages, judgments, executions, actions, inactions, claims, demands and causes of action of any nature whatsoever, whether at law or in equity, whether known or unknown, either now accrued or subsequently maturing, which any of Borrower Parties now has or subsequently may have by reason of any matter, cause or thing, from the beginning of the world to and including the Effective Date, including, without limitation, matters arising out of or relating to (a) the Loan, (b) the Loan Documents, (c) the Indebtedness, (d) the Property, and (e) any other agreement or transaction between Borrower Parties or any one of them and any of Lender Parties concerning matters arising out of or relating to the items set forth in subsections (a) – (d) above. Each of Borrower Parties, as to itself and all of its respective heirs, successors and assigns only, covenants and agrees never to institute or cause to be instituted or continue prosecution of any suit or other form of action or proceeding of any kind or nature whatsoever against any of Lender Parties by reason of or in connection with any of the foregoing matters, claims or causes of action.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: we must now determine whether Stebner was prejudiced sufficiently enough to render the jury’s verdict manifestly unjust. See Erickson, 175 Mont. at 91, 572 P.2d at 520. ¶21 We agree with Alside that Stebner was not prejudiced by Juror Schneider’s comment regarding her research and subsequent understanding of the term “preponderance.” The comment did not affect the verdict because the jurors had already voted eleven to one in favor of Alside when the comment was made. Also, two jurors testified that they based their vote on the evidence, not on Juror Schneider’s comment. Three jurors testified that they based their vote on the evidence presented at trial. Moreover, no new information was presented on the definition of “preponderance.” See Erickson, 175 Mont. at 92, 572 P.2d at 520 (<HOLDING>). According to the affidavits, the internet Options: A. holding that the alleged brady material was merely cumulative to the significant impeachment that already occurred during trial so there was no prejudice for a brady violation B. holding no prejudice occurred because no new information was presented on the material matter in dispute C. holding summary judgment was not warranted because material facts were in dispute D. holding no issue of material fact as to whether defendant was volunteer because he received no compensation E. holding that where no factual dispute is raised no hearing is required

assistant: The best answer is B. holding no prejudice occurred because no new information was presented on the material matter in dispute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: All information provided by the Disclosing Party shall remain the property of the Disclosing Party. Neither party does, by virtue of disclosure of the Confidential Information, grant, either expressly or by implication, estoppels or otherwise, any right or license to any patent, trade secret, invention, trademark, copyright, or other intellectual property right.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Loan Party and its Subsidiaries (excluding the Excluded Subsidiary) have good and marketable title to, or a valid license or (to the knowledge of any Loan Party) right to use, all patents, patent rights, trademarks, servicemarks, trade names, copyrights, technology, software, know-how database rights, rights of privacy and publicity, licenses and other intellectual property rights (collectively, “ Intellectual Property ”) that are necessary for the operation of their respective businesses as currently conducted, except where the failure to have any such rights, either individually or in the aggregate, would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. To the knowledge of any Loan Party, the operation of the respective businesses of the Loan Parties or any of their Subsidiaries (excluding the Excluded Subsidiary) as currently conducted does not infringe upon, misuse, misappropriate or violate any rights held by any Person except for such infringements, misuses, misappropriations or violations individually or in the aggregate, that would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. No claim or litigation regarding any Intellectual Property is pending or, to the knowledge of the any Loan Party, threatened against any Loan Party or any such Subsidiary, that, either individually or in the aggregate, could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement is personal to the Executive and shall not be assigned by the Executive. Any purported assignment by the Executive shall be null and void from the initial date of the purported assignment. The Company may assign this Agreement to any successor or assign (whether direct or indirect, by purchase, merger, consolidation, or otherwise) to all or substantially all of the business or assets of the Company. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of the Company and permitted successors and assigns .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Precedent Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original copy of this Precedent Agreement and all of which, when taken together, will be deemed to constitute one and the same agreement. Electronic copies of any signed original agreement will be deemed the same as delivery of an original. Upon request, any Party will confirm electronic copies of any signed original document by signing and delivering a duplicate original document.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: by using the service you hereby agree that the company shall not be responsible for any damage , claim or liability in connection with your use of any third party sites , including without limitation third party sites to which you have arrived via the service .

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 representations and warranties set forth in this Article 7 are made as of the date of this Agreement and are remade as of the Closing Date and shall not be deemed to be merged into or waived by the instruments of Closing, but shall survive the Closing for a period of one year. Seller and Purchaser shall have the right to bring an action on a breach of a representation or warranty in this Article 7 only if Seller or Purchaser, as the case may be, has given the other party written notice of the circumstances giving rise to the alleged breach within such one year period. Each party agrees to defend and indemnify the other against any claim, liability, damage or expense asserted against or suffered by such other party arising out of the breach or inaccuracy of any such representation or warranty.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the Program (a) the words “herein,” “hereof” and “hereunder” refer to the Program as a whole and not to any particular Article, Section or other subdivision, (b) reference to any Article or Section, means such Article or Section hereof and (c) the words “including” (and with correlative meaning “include”) means including, without limiting the generality of any description preceding such term. The Article and Section headings herein are for convenience only and shall not affect the construction hereof.

assistant: Interpretations
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: raping Almand was a private act not accomplished because of “power possessed by virtue of state law and made possible oMy because the wrongdoer [was] clothed with the authority of state law.” West, 487 U.S. at 59, 108 S.Ct. at 2255 (quoting United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 326, 61 S.Ct. 1031, 1043, 85 L.Ed. 1368 (1941), reh’g denied, 314 U.S. 707, 62 S.Ct. 51, 86 L.Ed. 565 (1941)); cf. Bennett v. Pippin, 74 F.3d 578, 589 (5th Cir.1996) (concluding rape of criminal suspect by sheriff was under color of state law when rape victim knew sheriff was investigating her case and where sheriff overcame her resistance by intimidation linked to Ms authority: “I can do what I want, I’m the sheriff’), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 68, 136 L.Ed.2d 29 (1996); Dang Vang, 944 F.2d at 479 (<HOLDING>). Considering that Bryant gained entry to the Options: A. holding that the defendant failed to demonstrate government acquiescence in part because he never reported alleged gang incidents to the government and therefore could not prove that the government was even aware of a problem B. holding the government liable to plaintiffs for breach of contract C. holding that jury could have reasonably concluded from expert testimony showing plaintiffs as hmong refugees were in awe of government officials that the defendant used his government position to exert influence and physical control over the plaintiffs D. holding that government entities are subject to suit under section 1983 when the alleged unconstitutional conduct results from an official government policy or from practices of government officials that are so wellsettled as to constitute a custom or usage with the force of law E. holding that jury could have relied upon other evidence besides plaintiffs expert witness testimony that would have supported its verdict

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that jury could have reasonably concluded from expert testimony showing plaintiffs as hmong refugees were in awe of government officials that the defendant used his government position to exert influence and physical control over the plaintiffs
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: courts, as stated above. See, e.g., Lakeside Boating & Bathing, Inc., 402 N.W.2d at 422. In Lyster, the court observed that it had “recognized the potential that substantial arbitration fees may make an arbitration agreement unconscionable.” See Lyster, 239 F.3d at 947 (citing Dobbins v. Hawk’s Enters., 198 F.3d 715, 717 (8th Cir.1999)). However, the court rejected the plaintiffs contention about the unconscionability of the cost and fees provision of the arbitration agreement at issue in that case, as follows: Lyster has not established on the record before us that undue harshness exists in the terms of the Agreement'in light of Missouri law governing unconscionability. See Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. Randolph, 531 U.S. 79, 90-92, 121 S.Ct. 513, 522, 148 L.Ed.2d 373 (2000) (<HOLDING>). Lyster, 239 F.3d at 947. Here, however, Faber Options: A. holding that a party seeking to compel arbitration must establish the existence of an arbitration agreement and show that the claims raised fall within the scope of that agreement B. holding the party seeking to invalidate an arbitration agreement because of prohibitive arbitration fees bears the burden of proof and the possibility of such party incurring prohibitive costs is too speculative to invalidate an arbitration agreement where the record reveals only that the agreement is silent on the subject of arbitration costs C. holding that where the arbitration agreement was silent on feesplitting and the costs imposed upon the plaintiff by the aaa were not prohibitive the plaintiff had presented little evidence to indicate that arbitration would be prohibitively expensive and the fees and costs of arbitration did not render the arbitration scheme unconscionable D. holding that plaintiffs had not satisfied their burden to show that the arbitration agreement was unenforceable because plaintiffs claims of prohibitive costs were too speculative E. holding that where an arbitration agreement between an employer and employee does not specifically provide for the handling of arbitration costs california courts should interpret the arbitration agreement as providing that the employer must bear the arbitration forum costs

assistant: The best answer is B. holding the party seeking to invalidate an arbitration agreement because of prohibitive arbitration fees bears the burden of proof and the possibility of such party incurring prohibitive costs is too speculative to invalidate an arbitration agreement where the record reveals only that the agreement is silent on the subject of arbitration costs
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: CURIAM. The defendant appeals from a final judgment of conviction and sentence for robbery. The trial court properly admitted collateral crime evidence to show the defendant’s intent. See § 90.404(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (1999); see also, e.g., Robertson v. State, 780 So.2d 106, 110-112 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (<HOLDING>). We also reject the appellant’s claim that the Options: A. holding that williams rule evidence of a threat against a previous partner involving a gun had the purpose of assisting the jury to understand defendants conduct at the time of the shooting with regard to the defendants motive and intent and his claim of accident and was properly admitted B. holding extrinsic evidence of defendants motive to possess gun inadmissible where defendant did not contest the issue of motive C. holding that the statement i have a gun is a threat of death D. holding that evidence of five prior antitrust actions brought against the defendants was irrelevant on issue of defendants motive to conspire and noting that simply because the defendants were named in past antitrust cases involving similar allegations does not make it more probable that the defendants had a motive to carry out their conspiracy E. holding the trial court properly admitted evidence of defendants subsequent conduct in determining whether he possessed the intent and motive for the first degree burglary charge

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that williams rule evidence of a threat against a previous partner involving a gun had the purpose of assisting the jury to understand defendants conduct at the time of the shooting with regard to the defendants motive and intent and his claim of accident and was properly admitted
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 with respect to the material terms and conditions of the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents, the Company confirms that neither it nor any other Person acting on its behalf has provided any of the Purchasers or their agents or counsel with any information that it believes constitutes or might constitute material, non-public information. The Company understands and confirms that the Purchasers will rely on the foregoing representation in effecting transactions in securities of the Company. All of the disclosure furnished by or on behalf of the Company to the Purchasers regarding the Company and its Subsidiaries, their respective businesses and the transactions contemplated hereby, including the Disclosure Schedules to this Agreement, is true and correct and does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The Company acknowledges and agrees that no Purchaser makes or has made any representations or warranties with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby other than those specifically set forth in Section 3.2 hereof.

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: This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any electronic signature complying with the U.S. federal ESIGN Act of 2000, e.g. , www.docusign.com) or other transmission method, and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of appeals. See supra p. 501. There is thus no room in the dissent's position for the considerations of "prudence and comity" that the dissent agrees must "shape our decision" as to whether to exercise injunctive power. Dissent at 504. 6 . A rule against simultaneous actions would seem especially unlikely in those circuits given the uncertain contours of the relief available to an aggrieved employee before DOT. While "make-whole,” as well as injunctive, relief is available in federal court, see, e.g., Steele v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 323 U.S. 192, 207, 65 S.Ct. 226, 234, 89 L.Ed. 173 (1944) (providing for "usual judicial remedies of injunction and award of damages" in fair representation claims); Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 196, 87 S.Ct. 903, 920, 17 L.Ed.2d 842 (1967) (<HOLDING>), we have been unable to ascertain whether (and Options: A. holding that punitive damages may be awarded for egregious violations of the lmrda B. holding that back pay may be awarded to the date of judgment C. holding that damages and injunctive relief may be awarded in fair representation cases when necessary to make employees whole D. holding that one who makes a representation that is misleading because it is in the nature of a halftruth assumes the obligation to make a full and fair disclosure of the whole truth E. holding that erisa provides relief only for clearly ascertainable damages with the intent to make plaintiffs whole which precludes recovery for speculative future harm

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that damages and injunctive relief may be awarded in fair representation cases when necessary to make employees whole
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: view the employment action in question as adverse.” Id. at 1449. Like the Supreme Court in White, the Eleventh Circuit established an objective, reasonable person standard. Id. at 1449. Likewise, the Eleventh Circuit stressed that “[a]ny adversity must be material; it is not enough that a transfer impose[ ] some de minimis inconvenience or alteration of responsibilities.” Id. at 1453. In other words, the Eleventh Circuit subsumed a requirement of materiality within its reasonable person standard for adversity. Id. (“Thus, any ... requirements for Doe must rise to a level that a reasonable person would deem materially adverse .... ”). This Court finds no appreciable difference in applying the standard articulate by the Supreme Court in White and the standard articulate 1 (S.D.Ala.1997) (<HOLDING>). The record contains evidence of multiple Options: A. holding that more than a year between the protected activity and the discharge is not close enough to support the causal connection requirement B. holding that five weeks between protected activity and adverse employment action insufficient to establish a causal connection C. holding that a 7month time period between the protected activity and the adverse employment action is too indirect to satisfy the causal connection requirement D. holding that twentyfour days between protected activity and termination is sufficient to infer existence of causal connection E. holding that there must be a causal connection between the advertising activity and the injury alleged in the underlying complaint

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that more than a year between the protected activity and the discharge is not close enough to support the causal connection requirement
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: During your service as Non-Executive Chairman, and solely for your convenience, the Company shall provide you with an office at such location or locations as you and the Company shall mutually determine, access to the Company’s telephone, email and computer systems and appropriate administrative support; provided that you are not required hereunder to work exclusively on the Company’s premises and are permitted to perform your services hereunder from home or other locations. The Company will reimburse you for any reasonable business expenses actually and properly incurred by you in connection with carrying out your duties as Non-Executive Chairman in accordance with applicable Company business expense reimbursement policies.

assistant: Expenses
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: are the separate property of each individual. The wages are the result of the efforts of the individual, not the dissolved community. However, when the earnings received after dissolution are in the form of retirement benefits or pension or profit sharing plans and are deferred compensation for work performed during the marriage, then there is a community property interest in the earnings. Van Loan v. Van Loan, 116 Ariz. 272, 569 P.2d 214 (1977); Woodward v. Woodward, 117 Ariz. 148, 571 P.2d 294 (App.1977); Provinzano v. Provinzano, 116 Ariz. 571, 570 P.2d 513 (App.1977). As discussed earlier, workmen’s compensation is based on the loss of earning capacity during the period of disability. There does not appear to be any element of retirement benefit or pension or profit sharin 979) (<HOLDING>). Cf. Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, 439 U.S. 572, Options: A. holding social security disability payments and military disability payments are separate property after dissolution of marriage B. holding that a social security disability determination is a legal proceeding C. holding veterans administration disability payments are separate property after dissolution of marriage D. holding parent entitled to credit for any social security disability benefits paid to child as a result of parents disability E. holding military service disability payments are community property

assistant: The best answer is A. holding social security disability payments and military disability payments are separate property after dissolution of marriage