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: and of all authority over its property and effects.” Hamzavi v. Bowen, 126 Md.App. 492, 730 A.2d 274, 276-77 (1999) (quotations and citations omitted). Therefore, for all practical purposes, Plaintiff has no title to the Lease, no authority to perform the Lease, no power to modify the Lease, and no power to initiate any other action based upon the Lease. Gov’t Reply at 6-7. Accordingly, Plaintiff also has no standing to seek an interpretation of the Lease. Id. at 7. The fact that the Receivership Order reserved Plaintiffs right to prosecute this lawsuit is insufficient to confer standing. Id. The right to sue for a declaratory judgment cannot be segregated from the Lease, control of which resides in the Receiver. Propat Int’l Corp. v. RPost, Inc., 473 F.3d 1187, 1190-94 (Fed.Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). In Propat, the appellate court explained Options: A. holding that an exclusive license granting the licensor a reversionary interest in the patent in the event of the licensees bankruptcy was a grant of all substantial rights such that the licensee could sue for patent infringement B. holding in a patent infringement case that plaintiff lacked standing where it held a conditional right to license a patent and enforce license agreements but did not have the right to transfer the patent C. holding a nonparty to a patent infringement suit who funded an unsuccessful challenge to a patent could not file a subsequent lawsuit again challenging the patent D. holding that where patent owner licensor retained substantial rights under license agreement licensee did not have an independent right to sue for infringement E. holding patent policy incorporated by reference into patent agreement

assistant: The best answer is B. holding in a patent infringement case that plaintiff lacked standing where it held a conditional right to license a patent and enforce license agreements but did not have the right to transfer the patent
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: 106, 111, 625 A.2d 579 (App.Div.1993) (“[I]t is the fundamental responsibility of the prosecutor to decide whom to prosecute ____”). It is fairly understood that the prosecutor has great discretion in selecting whom to prosecute and whom to divert to an alternative program, such as PTI. [State v.] Leonardis [Leonardis II], 73 N.J. [360,] 381, 375 A.2d 607 [(1977)]. The prosecutor’s discretion is not unbridled, however. If a defendant can “clearly and convincingly establish that the prosecutor’s refusal to sanction admission into the program was based on a patent and gross abuse of ... discretion,” Leonardis II, supra, 73 N.J. at 382, 375 A.2d 607, a reviewing court may overrule the prosecutor and order a defendant admitted to PTI. See also Dalglish, supra, 86 N.J. 503, 432 A.2d 74 (<HOLDING>). A “patent and gross abuse of discretion” is Options: A. holding that the standard of review under rule 60 is abuse of discretion B. holding that the standard of review for an award of statutory damages is even more deferential than an abuse of discretion standard C. holding that the patent and gross abuse of discretion standard applies after the adoption of the statewide program as part of the 1979 code of criminal justice D. recognizing the abuse of discretion standard and the requirement of evidentiary support for a finding of estoppel E. holding that the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the patent and gross abuse of discretion standard applies after the adoption of the statewide program as part of the 1979 code of criminal justice
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: Schedule 3.1(g) sets forth the capitalization of the Company which also includes the number of shares of Common Stock reserved for issuance and shares of Common Stock owned beneficially, and of record, by Affiliates of the Company as of the date hereof. Except as set forth in Schedule 3.1(g), since the date if its most recently filed periodic report under the Exchange Act, the Company has not issued any capital stock other than pursuant to the exercise of employee stock options under the Company’s stock option plans, the issuance of shares of Common Stock to (i) consultants for services and (ii) employees pursuant to the Company’s employee stock purchase plans and pursuant to the conversion and/or exercise of Common Stock Equivalents outstanding as of the date of the most recently filed periodic report under the Exchange Act. Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g), no Person has any right of first refusal, preemptive right, right of participation, or any similar right to participate in the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents. Except as set forth in Schedule 3.1(g) or as a result of the purchase and sale of the Securities, there are no outstanding options, warrants, scrip rights to subscribe to, calls or commitments of any character whatsoever relating to, or securities, rights or obligations convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for, or giving any Person any right to subscribe for or acquire any shares of Common Stock, or contracts, commitments, understandings or arrangements by which the Company or any Subsidiary is or may become bound to issue additional shares of Common Stock or Common Stock Equivalents. Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g), the issuance and sale of the Securities will not obligate the Company to issue shares of Common Stock or other securities to any Person (other than the Purchaser) and will not result in a right of any holder of Company securities to adjust the exercise, conversion, exchange or reset price under any of such securities. All of the outstanding shares of capital stock of the Company are duly authorized, validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable, have been issued in compliance with all federal and state securities laws, and none of such outstanding shares was issued in violation of any preemptive rights or similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g) and shareholder approval required by Section 4.16, no further approval or authorization of any stockholder, the Board of Directors or others is required for the issuance and sale of the Securities. Except as set forth on Schedule 3.1(g), there are no stockholders agreements, voting agreements or other similar agreements with respect to the Company’s capital stock to which the Company is a party or, to the knowledge of the Company, between or among any of the Company’s stockholders.

assistant: Capitalization
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 the consents that have been obtained on or prior to the Closing or filings required by the federal securities laws or stock exchange rules, no consent, approval, license, order, authorization, registration, declaration or filing with or of any Governmental Entity or other Person is required to be done or obtained by the Seller in connection with (i) the execution and delivery by the Seller of this Agreement, (ii) the performance by the Seller of its obligations under this Agreement or (iii) the consummation by the Seller of any of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

assistant: Consents
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: statute impacts the employers’ or plan sponsors’ discretion as to how health benefits may be structured under their employee benefit plans. It e^gplieitly directs that they may not structure their programs so as to exclude any provider willing and able to participate. See Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts, 471 U.S. 724, 737-41, 105 S.Ct.. 2380, 2388-89, 85 L.Ed.2d 728 (1985) (state statute requiring all insured benefit plans to purchase specific benefits when purchasing insurance ‘relates to’ employee benefit plans); Stuart Circle Hosp. Corp. v. Aetna Health Management, 995 F.2d 500, 502 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 579, 126 L.Ed.2d 478 (1993) (Virginia’s ‘any willing provider statute’ ‘relates to’ employee benefit plans); cf. United Wire, 995 F.2d at 1193 (<HOLDING>). Having determined that the Any Willing Options: A. holding that a statute regulating only hospital rates did not relate to erisa plans merely because it had the net result of increasing insurers and selffunded plans costs of providing benefits B. holding that selffunded employee benefit plans governed by erisa are not subject to direct state regulation C. holding that a termination of an erisa plans benefits must be based upon the plans terms and language D. holding that a statute relates to erisa plans for the purposes of preemption if it requires the plans to purchase the benefits specified in the statute when they purchase a certain kind of common insurance policy E. holding that a state law requiring benefit plans to include minimum benefits related to erisa plans

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a statute regulating only hospital rates did not relate to erisa plans merely because it had the net result of increasing insurers and selffunded plans costs of providing benefits
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 law and constitutional questions de novo. See Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review. The facts of the case are known to the parties and we do not repeat them here. I Petitioners argue that withdrawal of their applications for admission to the United States is similar to the turn-around at the border experienced by the alien in Tapia v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 997 (9th Cir. 2005). We disagree. Their decisions to withdraw their applications for admission is more akin to the voluntary departure granted to the alien in Vasquez-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 343 F.3d 961 (9th Cir.2003). Moreover, we accord Chevron deference to the BIA’s interpretation of 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(l)(A) in In re Avilez-Nava, 23 I. & N. Dec. 799, 800-01 (BIA 2005) (<HOLDING>). The BIA’s “stop-time” rule is a permissible Options: A. holding that an aliens continuous physical presence is broken if the alien was offered and accepted the opportunity to withdraw an application for admission B. holding that a district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the apa to review the denial of an aliens application for adjustment of status where the alien is in removal proceedings C. holding that aliens continuous presence in the country was interrupted by voluntary departure under threat of deportation proceedings D. holding that an alien parent may not establish a derivative claim for asylum by pointing to potential hardship to the aliens united states citizen child in the event of the aliens deportation E. holding that whether an alien satisfies the continuous presence requirement of 8 usc 1229b is a nondiscretionary determination because it involves straightforward statutory interpretation and application of law to fact and is therefore reviewable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an aliens continuous physical presence is broken if the alien was offered and accepted the opportunity to withdraw an application for admission
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: they get out of county and they request a court reporter and they think the court reporter is coming in the room, ... because that’s what automatically happens ... in their home county. And about halfway through the hearing they look around, and nobody is taking the record, and they find that you have to ask twice in this particular county or you have to ask nicely or there [is] some additional requirement.... The problem was that the Court discussed, and a number of the members are gone now that were there, but the concern that a lawyer would be expecting that he had jumped through the hoops only to look around and find that it wasn’t good enough. That was the concern. Id. at 5410-11. At the conclusion of the 2572429, at *1 (Tex.App.-East-land Oct. 13, 2005, no. pet. h.) (mem.op.) (<HOLDING>); Nabelek v. State., No. 14-03-00965-CV,- Options: A. holding that litigant must object at trial to preserve error for review B. holding that appellant failed to preserve error because it did not present appellate complaint to trial court C. holding that where the appellant has failed to demonstrate error the court is not required to search the record for an error D. holding that appellant failed to preserve error in court reporters failure to make record of trial by failing to object E. holding ineffective assistance of counsel claim for failure to object to prosecutors comments cognizable in postconviction motion since court unable to review on appeal because trial counsel failed to preserve error

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that appellant failed to preserve error in court reporters failure to make record of trial by failing to object
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of a Change in Control, Grantee’s outstanding RSUs will be deemed to have vested and any shares underlying such RSUs not previously issued shall be issued within ten days after the Change in Control. For purposes of clarification, in such a situation, all Time-Based RSUs will vest, and Performance-Based RSUs will vest at the target levels as described in Exhibit A hereto. A “Change in Control” shall be deemed to have taken place if (i) any Person (as defined below) other than an entity in the Company Group or an employee benefit plan of the Company Group (or any Person organized, appointed or established by the Company Group for or pursuant to the terms of any such employee benefit plan), together with all affiliates and associates of such Person, becomes the beneficial owner in the aggregate of 25% or more of the common stock of the Corporation then outstanding, or (ii) during any twenty-four month period, individuals who at the beginning of such period constituted the Board of Directors of the Corporation or The Bryn Mawr Trust Company (the “Bank”) cease, for any reason, to constitute a majority thereof, unless the election, or the nomination for election by the Corporation or the Bank’s shareholders, as the case may be, of each director who was not a director at the beginning of such period was approved by a vote of at least two-thirds of the directors in office at the time of such election or nomination, who were directors at the beginning of such period .

assistant: Change In Control
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: this issue because Mr. Hayre cannot prove that the missing SMRs would manifestly change the outcome of the 1972 rating decision. Consequently, we affirm the decision by the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims holding that Mr. Hayre’s claim of CUE was not well-grounded. Furthermore, a breach of the duty to assist in this case would not be an error of the sort that should be contemplated in the CUE analysis because the original RO decision in 1972 is not final for purposes of appeal. ating that where an appellant and his representative had not properly been furnished with a Statement of the Case, the period in which to appeal the adjudicative determination in question never commenced to run and that determination was not final); see also Ashley v. Derwinski, 2 VetApp. 307, 311 (1992) (<HOLDING>). A breach of the duty to assist in which the Options: A. holding that a board decision is required to vest the court of veterans appeals with jurisdiction over a claimants appeal B. holding that although the state court affirmed the zoning board of appeals dismissal of plaintiffs appeal the statecourt judgment did not trigger rookerfeldman where the complaint did not allege that the judgment itself violated federal law C. holding that where the board did not mail decision in accordance with the provisions of 38 usc 7104e the period within which to appeal to the court of appeals for veterans claims did not commence to run D. holding that a court of veterans appeals decision interpreting 38 usc 8713 overruling the secretarys prior interpretation and remanding back to the board was a final and appealable decision E. holding vagenerated documents to be in the possession of the secretary and the board at the time of the board decision and thus constructively part of the record of proceedings as mandated by 38 usc 7252b

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that where the board did not mail decision in accordance with the provisions of 38 usc 7104e the period within which to appeal to the court of appeals for veterans claims did not commence to run
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 any Loan Party nor any Subsidiary thereof is in default under or with respect to, or a party to, any Contractual Obligation that could, either individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. No Default has occurred and is continuing or would result from the consummation of the Transactions.

assistant: No Defaults
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 Guaranty shall not terminate until such time, if any, as (i) all Obligations shall be finally and irrevocably paid in full in cash, (ii) no Notes shall remain outstanding, (iii) all commitments to lend under the Purchase Agreements shall have terminated and (iv) there shall exist no other outstanding payment or reimbursement obligations (other than contingent indemnification obligations for which no claims shall have been asserted) of the Borrower or the Guarantors to the Agent under any of the Transaction Documents. Thereafter, but subject to the following, Agent, on its behalf and as agent for Purchasers, shall take such action and execute such documents as the Guarantors may request (and at the Guarantors’ cost and expense) in order to evidence the termination of this Guaranty. Payment of all of the Obligations owing from time to time shall not operate as a discontinuance of this Guaranty. Each Guarantor further agrees that, to the extent that any Company makes a payment or payments to Purchasers or Agent on the Obligations, or Purchasers or Agent receive any proceeds of collateral securing the Obligations or any other payments with respect to the Obligations, which payment or receipt of proceeds or any part thereof is subsequently invalidated, declared to be fraudulent or preferential, set aside or required to be returned or repaid to any Company, its estate, trustee, receiver, debtor in possession or any other person or entity, including, without limitation, the Guarantors, under any insolvency or bankruptcy law, state or federal law, common law or equitable cause, then to the extent of such payment, return or repayment, the obligation or part thereof which has been paid, reduced or satisfied by such amount shall be reinstated and continued in full force and effect as of the date when such initial payment, reduction or satisfaction occurred, and this Guaranty shall continue in full force notwithstanding any contrary action which may have been taken by any Purchaser or Agent in reliance upon such payment, and any such contrary action so taken shall be without prejudice to any Purchaser’s or Agent’s rights under this Guaranty and shall be deemed to have been conditioned upon such payment having become final and irrevocable. Upon satisfaction of the Obligations the Guarantors’ obligations under this Agreement shall immediately terminate and the Guaranty shall be void.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Request any Loan, and the Borrower shall not use, and shall procure that its Subsidiaries and its or their respective directors, officers, employees and agents shall not use, the proceeds of any Loan, (A) in furtherance of an offer, payment, promise to pay, or authorization of the payment or giving of money, or anything else of value, to any person in violation of any Anti-Corruption Laws, (B) for the purpose of funding, financing or facilitating any activities, business or transaction of or with any Sanctioned Person, or in any Sanctioned Country in violation of Sanctions, or (C) in any manner that would result in the violation of any Sanctions applicable to any party hereto.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, together with all Exhibits, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter contained herein. This Agreement supersedes all prior understandings and agreements between the parties with respect to the subject matter contained herein. For the avoidance of doubt, the separation and Settlement Agreement dated May 12, 2017 remains in full force and effect. This Agreement and the rights and obligations set forth herein may not be modified, amended or waived, whether in whole or in part, except by a writing signed by both parties.

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: of each of the burglaries. See Pa.R.E. 404(b)(2) (permitted uses of other-bad-acts evidence). His presence near eight burglaries over 5 months, where each burglary was characterized by substantially similar circumstances pointing to a common culprit or culprits, is powerful identity evidence. With regard to whether the evidence from the different burglaries was capable of separation by the jury, and whether Appellant was unduly prejudiced by the decision not to sever the cases, the trial court notes that the verdict speaks for itself: Appellant was acquitted of several burglaries and conspiracy counts, indicating that the jury clearly was able to parse the evidence involved in each individual case. See TOO at 11. We agree. See Commonwealth v. Dozzo, 991 A.2d 898, 903 (Pa. Super. 2010) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court Options: A. holding that each defendants actions in a 1983 case must be considered individually B. holding that the jury found the ajppellant not guilty of all charges in one case and not guilty of three out of four charges in a second case demonstrating the jury considered each case and each charge separately and did not cumulate the evidence C. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendants request for severance because the district court nullified any prejudicial error when it repeatedly admonished the jury throughout the trial to consider the evidence only against the defendant to whom it related and at the end of trial gave the jury instructions that admonished the jury to consider separately each offense and evidence in support of each offense D. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to accept the defendants guilty pleas to two counts of the indictment and stating that even if the trial court erred the error had not prejudiced the defendant because he was found guilty by the jury of the charges to which he intended to plead and the evidence of the other crimes would have been admissible in the trial for the first degree murder charge E. holding that an exception to the charges having to do with contributory negligence charges two three and four was insufficient to preserve issue for appeal

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the jury found the ajppellant not guilty of all charges in one case and not guilty of three out of four charges in a second case demonstrating the jury considered each case and each charge separately and did not cumulate the evidence
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 provisions of this 2015 Performance Plan are severable and if any one or more provisions are determined to be illegal or otherwise unenforceable, in whole or in part, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless be binding and enforceable.

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: This Agreement may be amended from time to time by the Company in its discretion; provided , however , that this Agreement may not be modified in a manner that would have a materially adverse effect on you as determined in the discretion of the Administrator, except as provided in the Plan or in a written document signed by each of the parties hereto.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: instagram is not responsible for the actions , content , information , or data of third parties , and you release us , our directors , officers , employees , and agents from any claims and damages , known and unknown , arising out of or in any way connected with any claim you have against any such third parties .

assistant: Limitation of 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: All the accounts, books, registers, ledgers, YNXG Board minutes and financial and other records of whatsoever kind of YNXG have been fully, properly and accurately kept and completed; there are no material inaccuracies or discrepancies of any kind contained or reflected therein; and they give and reflect a true and fair view of the financial, contractual and legal position of YNXG. YNXG maintains a system of internal accounting controls sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that: (i) transactions are executed in accordance with management’s general or specific authorizations; (ii) transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP and to maintain asset accountability; (iii) access to assets is permitted only in accordance with management’s general or specific authorization; and (iv) the recorded accountability for assets is compared with the existing assets at reasonable intervals and appropriate actions are taken with respect to any differences.

assistant: Books
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: Your employment hereunder will terminate upon your "Disability". For purposes of this Agreement, Disability has the same meaning as provided in the long-term disability plan or policy maintained or, if applicable, most recently maintained, by Tyson. If no long-term disability plan or policy was ever maintained on behalf of you or, if the determination of Disability relates to an incentive stock option, Disability means that condition described in Section 22(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code"), as amended from time to time. In the event of a dispute, the determination of Disability will be made by the Committee (as defined in Tyson's equity incentive plan) and will be supported by advice of a physician competent in the area to which such Disability relates.

assistant: Disability
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 limitations in Section 5, the Company shall indemnify, and advance Expenses to, Indemnitee (a) as provided in this Agreement and (b) as permitted by Maryland law in effect on the Effective Date and as amended from time to time; provided, however, that no change in Maryland law shall have the effect of reducing the benefits available to Indemnitee hereunder based on Maryland law as in effect on the Effective Date. Subject to the limitations in Section 5, the rights of Indemnitee provided in this Section 3 shall include, without limitation, the rights set forth in the other sections of this Agreement and any additional indemnification permitted by Section 2-418(g) of the Maryland General Corporation Law (the “MGCL”).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: F.R.D. 471, 472 (S.D.N.Y.1997) (Connor, J.); Altman v. Liberty Equities Corp., 322 F.Supp. 377, 378-79 (S.D.N.Y.1971) (Tyler, J.) (describing “waiver by implication”). The inquiry courts use to determine whether a party has waived his right to challenge venue is fact specific. See Sherman, 86 F.R.D. at 472. As a result, “[tjhere is no clear boundary ... [indicating] what action a party may take during the pretrial stage and still invoke its venue objection and what conduct on its part will constitute waiver of that defense.” Id. However, a party’s repeated representations to the court that it is the proper forum may waive its right to subsequently raise the claim that venue lies elsewhere. See Orb Factory Ltd. v. Design Science Toys, 6 F.Supp.2d 203, 206-07 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (Sweet, J.) (<HOLDING>); Altman, 322 F.Supp. at 379 (holding that a Options: A. holding that a partys repeated representations that venue was proper in one forum waived its right to bring a subsequent motion under 28 usc 1406a challenging venue B. recognizing that special venue statutes are supplemented by the 28 usc 1391 venue provisions applicable to all civil cases C. holding venue proper where proper when the action was commenced D. holding that where a defendant if given the opportunity to renew a motion for a change of venue immediately prior to trial but fails to do so the right to challenge venue is waived E. holding that transfer most appropriate under 28 usc 1406a

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a partys repeated representations that venue was proper in one forum waived its right to bring a subsequent motion under 28 usc 1406a challenging venue
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that he was on S.L.’s property, and he admitted that he took cigarettes and a lighter from the patio table. According to the recorded statement that Andrus gave to Detective Le-wállen, after' entering S.L.’s garage, An-drus changed his mind about being on S.L.’s property and decided to leave. The evidence at trial shows that Andrus did not have permission to be on the property or in S.L.’s garage or breezeway. Given the circumstances proven by the evidence admitted during Andrus’s trial, the jury could have reasonably inferred from the evidence that Andrus, when entering the garage or breezeway, intended to commit theft under a standard of beyond reasonable doubt even if he later changed his mind - about committing a crime. See Mauldin v. State, 628 S.W.2d 793, 795 (Tex.Crim.App.1982) (<HOLDING>); Solis v. State, 589 S.W.2d 444, 446 Options: A. holding defendants plea to indictment alleging 8000 theft was not an admission to the theft amount B. holding that against her will in the rape statute means without her consent and that the fact that the victim was under the age of consent was sufficient to establish that element C. holding that the defendants entry into the building having been made in the nighttime without the consent of the owner is sufficient to show an intent to commit theft D. holding that the plaintiff must show felonious intent to commit theft in order to establish a violation of section 8120141 E. holding that the consent of the driver was invalid when the officer knew that the passenger was the owner of the automobile

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the defendants entry into the building having been made in the nighttime without the consent of the owner is sufficient to show an intent to commit theft
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.” Michael T. Flannery, First, Do No Harm: The Use of Covert Video Surveillance to Detect Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy An Unethical Means of Preventing Child Abuse, 32 U. Mich. J.L. Ref. 105, 154 (1998). See Jones v. State, 648 So.2d 669, 676-77 (Fla.), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1147, 115 S.Ct. 2588, 132 L.Ed.2d 836 (1995) (finding that defendant did not have heightened expectation of privacy in his hospital room that he would have had in his home, and noting that although defendant could expect that hospital personnel would enter to perform routine hospital procedures and visitors would enter if he did not object, he had no reason to believe that third parties would enter to look for and seize his personal property); People v. Brown, 88 Cal.App.3d 283, 151 Cal.Rptr. 749, 755 (1979) (<HOLDING>); People v. Courts, 205 Mich.App. 326, 517 Options: A. holding that a hospital can conspire with members of its medical staff B. holding that physicians as agents of the hospital are indistinguishable from the hospital for immunity purposes under the lgaa C. holding that warrantless seizure of defendants clothing from private hospital room was improper D. holding that because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the expert report adequate as to the vicarious liability claim against the hospital based on the actions of the doctors plaintiffs suit against the hospital including her claim that the hospital was vicariously hable for the actions of its nurses could proceed E. recognizing that at least for certain purposes a hospital room is fully under the control of the medical staff yet for other purposes it is the patients room because patient understands that nurses doctors food handlers and others enter and exit hospital room in accordance with medical need and hospital routine

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that at least for certain purposes a hospital room is fully under the control of the medical staff yet for other purposes it is the patients room because patient understands that nurses doctors food handlers and others enter and exit hospital room in accordance with medical need and hospital routine
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 Units shall become non-forfeitable and fully vested on the date exactly three years from the Grant Date (“Vesting Date”) if you remain in the continuous employment of the Company until the Vesting Date. In the event of termination of your employment (voluntary or involuntary) prior to the Vesting Date, you shall forfeit all of the Units granted under this Agreement and any payment contemplated by Paragraph 4 below.

assistant: Vesting
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: contends that Plaintiff cannot show from the evidence of record that her termination was due to her informal complaints and transfer requests. (Doc. No. 30, pp. 18-19). “To establish a causal connection, a plaintiff must show that ‘the decision-makers were aware of the protected conduct’ and ‘that the protected activity and the adverse employment action were not wholly unrelated.’ ” Gupta, 212 F.3d at 590 (internal citations omitted). At a minimum, Plaintiff must show that the adverse action followed the protected conduct. Griffin v. GTE Fla., Inc., 182 F.3d 1279, 1284 (11th Cir.1999). In other words, Plaintiff must show a temporal link between the protected conduct and an adverse employment action. See Sullivan v. Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp., 170 F.3d 1056, 1060-61 (11th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); Sierminski v. Transouth Fin. Corp., 216 F.3d Options: A. holding that five weeks between protected activity and adverse employment action insufficient to establish a causal connection B. holding that no causal link existed between protected activity in february 1994 and adverse employment actions in late 1994 and early 1995 C. holding causal link between alleged discriminatory remarks and adverse employment action insufficient D. holding that a prima facie case of retaliation requires a causal link between the employees protected activity and the employers adverse employment action E. holding that an intervening act of misconduct by the plaintiff can break the causal link between the protected conduct and the adverse employment action

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that no causal link existed between protected activity in february 1994 and adverse employment actions in late 1994 and early 1995
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 IP Security Agreement has been entered into in conjunction with the provisions of the Security Agreement. The Company hereby acknowledges and confirms that the grant of the security interest hereunder to, and the rights and remedies of, the Purchaser with respect to the Collateral are more fully set forth in the Security Agreement, the terms and provisions of which are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein.

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 shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York applicable to contracts made and to be performed within such State, except with respect to the internal affairs of the Company and its stockholders, which shall be governed by the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

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: was required, and the Motion should be denied based upon the pleadings. B. The Motion should be Denied on its Merits Defendant moves to suppress a statement made to police on February 5, 1999, immediately following his arrest. At the April 27, 1999 hearing, the Government indicated that it did not intend to use this statement as part of its case in chief at Defendant’s trial. “The key inquiry with respect to the admission of inculpatory statements for the limited purpose of impeachment is the question of whether the statements were voluntary and not coerced.” United States v. Martin, 974 F.Supp. 677, 679 (C.D.Ill.1997) (citing Oregon v. Hass, 420 U.S. 714, 722, 95 S.Ct. 1215, 1220-21, 43 L.Ed.2d 570 (1975); United States ex rel. Adkins v. Greer, 791 F.2d 590, 596 n. 5 (7th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>)). “The appropriate test for determining Options: A. holding that nonself inculpatory statements are not statements against penal interest under fedrevid 804b3 B. holding that the confrontation clause of the sixth amendment is not violated by the admission of hearsay statements under the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule where the defendant was able to confront and crossexamine the witness who claimed that the statements at issue were made C. holding that the disputed issue with respect to the state law bar was properly submitted to the jury D. holding that the key inquiry with respect to the admission of inculpatory statements as impeachment is the issue of voluntariness E. holding that the admission of out of court statements by a government witness when responding to an inquiry by defense counsel creates invited error

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the key inquiry with respect to the admission of inculpatory statements as impeachment is the issue of voluntariness
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 Holy Bible, Matthew 18:15-17 (New American Standard Bible). 2 . The National Association of Evangelicals, the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, and Dallas- Theological Seminary submitted amicus curiae briefs in support of Westbrook’s petition. 3 . Most courts agree that the general prohibition on the adjudication of religious questions, once triggered, precludes further adjudicatio 5 n. 10 (Colo.1988) (" 'Family counseling and psychological counseling are two notable areas in which there is substantial overlap between the secular and religious aspects of a spiritual counselor’s activities.’") (quoting Note, Clergy Malpractice: Taking Spiritual Counseling Conflicts Beyond Intentional Tort Analysis, 19 Rutgbrs L.J. 419, 437 (1988)), and citing Comment, Mad (5th Cir.1972) (<HOLDING>); c/1 Scotts African Union Methodist Protestant Options: A. recognizing that the relationship between an organized church and its ministers is its lifeblood and that application of title vii to this relationship would encroach on religious freedom B. holding claims based on title vii subject to arbitration C. holding that a claim for discrimination in private employment is not preempted by title vii D. holding application of title vii to the employment relationship between the salvation army and its ordained minister would involve a review that would cause improper state intrusion on matters of church governance E. recognizing title vii does not provide the exclusive remedy for all employment discrimination claims even if the title vii and section 1983 claim factually overlap

assistant: The best answer is D. holding application of title vii to the employment relationship between the salvation army and its ordained minister would involve a review that would cause improper state intrusion on matters of church governance
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 defense of qualified immunity). 126 . See Pierce v. Smith, 111 F.3d at 871-72; Meadowbriar Home for Children, Inc. v. Gunn, 81 F.3d 521, 530 (5th Cir.1996); Hassan v. Lubbock Independent School District, 55 F.3d 1075, 1078 (5th Cir.1995), cert. denied;-U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 532, 133 L.Ed.2d 438 (1995); Salas v. Carpenter, 980 F.2d at 310; White v. Taylor, 959 F.2d at 544: "If reasonable public officials could differ on the lawfulness of the defendant's actions, the defendant is entitled to immunity.”; Duckett v. City of Cedar Park, Texas, 950 F.2d at 279-80; Streetman v. Jordan, 918 F.2d at 556; Mouille v. City of Live Oak, 918 F.2d at 552-53; and Hopkins v. Stice, 916 F.2d 1029, 1030-31 (5 th Cir.1990). See also Brawner v. City of Richardson, Texas, 855 F.2d 187, 192 (5th Cir.1988), (<HOLDING>); and Gunaca v. State of Texas, 65 F.3d 467, Options: A. holding that the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right B. holding that plaintiffs complaint stated a claim for a constitutional deprivation but that the contours of the right at issue were not clearly established and that official was therefore entitled to qualified immunity C. holding that the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he or she is doing violates that right D. holding that for purposes of the second question the right must have been clearly established in a particularized sense such that a reasonable official would have understood that what he was doing violated that right E. holding that clearly established means the contours of the right were so clear at the time the officials acted that a reasonable official would have understood that what he was doing violated that right

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that clearly established means the contours of the right were so clear at the time the officials acted that a reasonable official would have understood that what he was doing violated that right