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: 29, 2007) (Gottschall, J.); Report and Recommendation, No. 05 C 2572 (Aug. 3, 2007) (Keys, M.J.). 2 . Alexander asserts claims under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Fifth Amendment prohibits a deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law by the federal government, but NEIU is a state agency. U.S. Const, amend. V. However, as a state agency, NEIU must comply with due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. Id. amend. XIV. 3 . They also argue, correctly, that NEIU is not a “person” for the purposes of § 1983. Consequently, Alexander may not assert a § 1983 claim against NEIU. See 30 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/1-7 (including universities within the definition of "state agencies”); Kaimowitz v. Bd. of Trustees of Univ. of Ill., 951 F.2d 765, 767 (7th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); Alexander v. Northeastern Ill. Univ., No. 05 Options: A. holding that a state is not a person under 42 usc 1983 B. holding that a police department is not a person within the meaning of section 1983 C. holding that a state is not a person within the meaning of 1983 D. holding that a state university is not a person within the meaning of 1983 and therefore is not subject to suits brought under 1983 E. holding state university is not a person under 1983

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a state university is not a person within the meaning of 1983 and therefore is not subject to suits brought under 1983
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As provided in Section 2(d) , Schedules 5 through 9 attached hereto set forth a complete and accurate list of: (i) all of the U.S. patents, patent applications, trademark registrations, trademark applications and copyright registrations filed or registered in, as applicable, the United States Patent and Trademark Office or the United States Copyright Office that are owned by each Grantor as of the date hereof, (ii) all of the material domain names owned by each Grantor as of the date hereof, and (iii) all of the material Foreign Intellectual Property owned by each Grantor as of the date hereof.

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: The initial term of this Agreement shall continue until the two-year anniversary of the Effective Date, subject to earlier termination as provided herein. On each annual anniversary of the Effective Date, the term shall be extended for a period of one year in addition to the then-remaining term, provided that the Company has not given notice to the Employee in writing at least 90 days prior to such annual anniversary date that the term of this Agreement shall not be extended further, and provided further that the Employee has not received an unsatisfactory performance review by either the Board of Directors or the board of directors of the Bank. No annual extension can automatically extend beyond the Employee’s 65 th birthday.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will not request any Borrowing or Letter of Credit, and the Borrower shall not use, and shall not lend, contribute or otherwise make available, or permit its Subsidiaries or its or their respective directors, officers, employees and agents to use, the proceeds of any Borrowing or Letter of Credit (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 or (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 to the extent such activities, businesses or transaction would be prohibited by Sanctions if conducted by a corporation incorporated in the United States or in a European Union member state.

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: Employee represents and warrants to the Company that, at all times during the term of this Agreement, Employee’s performance of the services contemplated by this Agreement shall not conflict with any agreement, commitment or obligation on the part of Employee to any employer or other third party.

assistant: No Conflicts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Interest hereunder based on the Administrative Agent’s prime lending rate shall be computed on the basis of a year of 365 days (or 366 days in a leap year) and paid for the actual number of days elapsed (including the first day but excluding the last day). All other interest and all fees hereunder shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360 days and paid for the actual number of days elapsed (including the first day but excluding the last day). Each determination by the Administrative Agent of an interest rate or fee hereunder shall be made in good faith and, except for manifest error, shall be final, conclusive and binding for all purposes. The Administrative Agent shall, at the request of the Borrower, deliver to the Borrower a statement showing the quotations used by the Administrative Agent in determining any interest rate hereunder.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a fixed meaning of the term seaman. The regulations emphasize flexibility, indicating that the term’s meaning is governed by the context in which it is used and the purpose of the statute in which it is found. Id. § 783.29(c). Similarly, we must evaluate an employee’s duties based upon the character of the work he actually performs and not on what it is called or the place where it is performed. Id. § 783.33. As we have recognized, the FLSA as a whole is pervaded by the idea that what each employee actually does determines its application to him. Walling v. W.D. Haden Co., 153 F.2d 196, 199 (5th Cir.1946). Accordingly, the application of the seaman exemption generally depends on the facts in each case. See McLaughlin v. Bos. Harbor Cruise Lines, Inc., 419 F.3d 47, 51-52 (1st Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). III. With this framework guiding us, we will Options: A. holding that objection was timely even though objection was not made until after question was answered B. recognizing application of the doctrines may involve a fact question for the jury but not finding such a question in the case before it C. recognizing that application of the seaman exemption is a factintensive question that can be answered in many cases only after a trial D. holding that prejudice from a question that violated doyle was cured by immediately sustaining objection before the question was answered E. recognizing that the right to be present can be waived in noncapital felony federal cases

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that application of the seaman exemption is a factintensive question that can be answered in many cases only after a trial
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Aleman v. Sternes, 320 F.3d 687, 690-91 (7th Cir.2003), which applied the two-step approach); Gutierrez, 389 F.3d at 306. The Fifth Circuit has suggested in dicta that it might do the same. See Garcia v. Quarterman, 454 F.3d 441, 447 (5th Cir.2006). Taking guidance from Esparza, we now join those circuits. We hold that AEDPA replaced the Brecht standard with the standard of Chapman plus AEDPA deference when, as here, a state court made a harmless-error determination. This result makes practical sense for two reasons. First, a judicially crafted standard generally gives way when Congress steps in to address the same issue, as long as the original standard was not constitutionally required. See, e.g., Schweiker v. Chilicky, 487 U.S. 412, 425, 108 S.Ct. 2460, 101 L.Ed.2d 370 (1988) (<HOLDING>). That is precisely what happened here. The Options: A. holding that social security regulations and procedures precluded a bivens action B. holding that the courtcreated bivens remedy is unavailable when congress through the social security act provided an alternative mechanism for a plaintiff to vindicate his due process rights C. holding that the csra precludes even those bivens claims for which the act prescribes no alternative remedy because it found no inadvertence by congress in omitting the remedy D. holding that where plaintiffs had an alternative remedy the court would not substitute its judgment for that of congress by creating an implied right of action E. holding the privacy act to constitute a special factor precluding a bivens remedy

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the courtcreated bivens remedy is unavailable when congress through the social security act provided an alternative mechanism for a plaintiff to vindicate his due process rights
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: unconstitutional. For example, the maximum sentence authorized for possession of more than two ounces, but less than one-half pound of .marijuana, is two years imprisonment.. While a sentence of two years and one day for such' a crime would be an illegal sentence, it would likely not be grossly disproportionate. 5 . We have previously held that the mastermind of a homicide can be more culpable than even a codefendant who actually delivers the killing blow. See State v. Piper, 2006 S.D. 1, ¶ 90, 709 N.W.2d 783, 816 ("Piper plánned and directed the plot from its inception. He cites to no authority which holds less culpable the masterminds of a murder plot while more severely punishing those who assist'in carrying it out.”); State v. Page, 2006 S.D. 2, ¶ 111-12, 709 N.W.2d 739, 775 (<HOLDING>). 6 . Rehabilitation "is not a bright-line rule Options: A. holding that ussg 3c11 reaches attempts to obstruct whether direct or indirect in affirming obstruction of justice enhancement for incarcerated defendant who wrote a note stating that he did not trust at all a codefendant asking for location of codefendants residence and implying possibility of rough sexual altercation with codefendant upon defendants release from detention even though codefendant never received note because totality of circumstances surrounding note indicated an indirect attempt to obstruct justice B. holding trial court in determining proper sentence of a defendant may validly consider codefendants belowguideline sentence where the codefendant is at least if not more culpable than defendant C. holding that killing more than one person in a single automobile accident justified multiple homicide convictions D. holding defendant who instigated incident resulting in homicide more culpable than codefendant E. holding that more than notice to a defendant is required

assistant: The best answer is D. holding defendant who instigated incident resulting in homicide more culpable than codefendant
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 information relating to or concerning the Company or any of its Subsidiaries set forth in this Agreement or in the exhibits hereto is true and correct in all material respects, and the Company has not omitted to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements made herein or therein, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. No event or circumstance has occurred or exists with respect to the Company or any of its Subsidiaries or its or their business, properties, prospects, operations or financial conditions, which, under applicable law, rule or regulation, requires public disclosure or announcement by the Company prior to the date of this Agreement but which has not been so publicly announced or disclosed (assuming for this purpose that the Company’s reports filed under the 1934 Act are being incorporated into an effective registration statement filed by the Company under the 1933 Act).

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 by one or more of the parties to this Agreement on any number of separate counterparts (including by facsimile or other electronic transmission), and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. A set of the copies of this Agreement signed by all the parties shall be lodged with the Borrowers and the Administrative Agent.

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: make the point that an illegitimate purpose can often be achieved without any further act beyond the obtaining of the process. Although our cases are not uniform in this respect, some support this point of view. Without turning on any additional act of misuse, a number of cases find that initiating process alone can at times be so coercive and promoting of ulterior advantage that it supports an abuse of process claim. See Malone v. Belcher, 216 Mass. 209, 210-211 (1913) (allowing an abuse of process claim where an “attachment was made for the ostensible purpose of collecting a commission,” but a jury could find that the real object was to prevent the conveyance of the property to another and to secure it for the party suing for the commission); Reardon v. Sadd, 262 Mass. 345 (1928) (<HOLDING>); Jacoby v. Spector, 292 Mass. 366, 369 (1935) Options: A. holding that arguable probable cause provides an objectively reasonable justification for issuing process and thus gives rise to qualified immunity against an abuse of process claim no less than against a false arrest claim B. recognizing an abuse of process claim for an attachment that a jury could find was intended to coerce a factory owner to settle a claim against her on a debt that the claimant knew was incurred by a different party C. holding that insured cannot bring an action against its insurer for bad faith failure to settle a claim in the absence of an excess verdict D. holding the insurer liable for failing to settle the claim when time was of the essence E. holding that to establish a claim for abuse of process a claimant must demonstrate an act in the use of the process not proper in the regular prosecution of the proceedings

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing an abuse of process claim for an attachment that a jury could find was intended to coerce a factory owner to settle a claim against her on a debt that the claimant knew was incurred by a different party
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 Institutional Investor represents to the Company that it is acquiring New Notes solely for its own account and not as a nominee or agent for any other person and not with a view to, or for sale in connection with, any distribution thereof (within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “ Securities Act ”)), that would be in violation of the securities laws of the United States of America or any state thereof, without prejudice, however, to such Institutional Investor’s right at all times to sell or otherwise dispose of any part of such New Notes in accordance with the terms thereof and applicable law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Term, the Company shall reimburse Executive for all reasonable and necessary out-of-pocket expenses incurred by Executive in the performance of his duties under this Agreement in accordance with the Company’s customary and normal practices, subject to the presentment of appropriate vouchers in accordance with the Company’s normal policies for expense verification. Company shall reimburse the Executive for all reasonable dues of professional associations and organizations to which Executive belongs. Company shall reimburse Executive for all costs relating to Executive's cell phone and all cell phone usage charges.

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: Father’s relatives in the United States as possible placement options. Considering the totality of the circumstances, we do not agree with CYFD that these efforts met the minimum statutory requirements under the ANA. See Patricia H., 2002-NMCA-061, ¶ 28 (“[An appellate court’s] job is not to determine whether CYFD did everything possible; our task is limited by our statutory scope of review to whether CYFD complied with the minimum required under law.”). Father made efforts to comply with the services offered in Mexico as part of his treatment plan once he was free from the restrictions of his incarceration. In light of Father’s efforts, we cannot attribute the resulting lack of evidence related to the causes and conditions ofneglectto Father. Cf. Hector C., 2008-NMCA-079, ¶ 20 (<HOLDING>). Additionally, Child had been in CYFD’s Options: A. holding that plaintiff had cared for his father who suffered severe depression after murder of his daughter within meaning of fmla interim regulation because inter alia he discussed with his father grief associated with murder and provided reassuring physical presence to his father B. holding the trial court made sufficient findings where it found in summary that father was physically able to make the required payments by virtue of his ability to work and earn income that he had the present financial ability to work and earn income that he had the present financial ability to satisfy his arrearage or to obtain the means by which said arrearage could be satisfied and that father failed to present adequate facts to excuse his noncompliance and inability to comply C. holding that the trial court had erred in imposing an obligation to pay child support when clear and convincing evidence established that the husband was not the father of the child D. holding that cyfd failed to present clear and convincing evidence that the causes and conditions of neglect were unlikely to change in the foreseeable future when the father complied with his treatment plan and cyfd failed to reevaluate the father following his release from prison E. holding that a child was not barred by a former statute of limitations applicable to actions to establish the existence of a father and child relationship when the current action was to establish the nonexistence of a father and child relationship and the presumed father no longer persisted in maintaining paternity

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that cyfd failed to present clear and convincing evidence that the causes and conditions of neglect were unlikely to change in the foreseeable future when the father complied with his treatment plan and cyfd failed to reevaluate the father following his release from prison
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company hereby employs the Executive, and the Executive hereby accepts such employment, as the Senior Vice President-Human Resources of the Company, effective as of the Effective Date, on the terms and subject to the conditions of this Agreement. The Executive agrees to perform such duties and responsibilities as are customarily performed by persons acting in such capacity or as are assigned to Executive from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Company or its designees. The Executive acknowledges and agrees that from time to time the Company may assign Executive additional positions with the Company or the Company’s subsidiaries, with such title, duties and responsibilities as shall be determined by the Company. The Executive agrees to serve in any and all such positions without additional compensation. The Executive will report directly to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company.

assistant: Positions
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: court ... ”). Nevertheless, at the beginning of the delinquency hearing which was held the same day the court denied the motion to dismiss, the court permitted the defendant to orally assert the additional grounds in open court and on the record. Thus, the additional grounds asserted were preserved for our review. However, in light of the trial court’s correct ruling on the jurisdictional issue and the defendant’s failure to include that issue in his brief, the jurisdictional issue has been abandoned, see also Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(6)("[l]he argument must contain the contentions of the appellant on the issues presented, and the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes, and parts of the record relied on.”); Gann v. Fruehauf Corp., 52 F.3d 1320, 1328 (5th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>), and does not warrant our review sua sponte. 4 Options: A. holding that appellant waived claims on appeal by failing to advance arguments in support of them in the body of his brief B. holding that appellant abandoned argument by failing to argue it in body of brief C. holding that appellant waived issue by failing to raise it in opening brief D. holding that party waived argument by failing to brief it on appeal E. holding that the appellant had waived claims raised on appeal because his opening brief contained no substantive arguments pertaining to those claims and the court would not permit him to incorporate the arguments set forth in his filings with the district court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that appellant waived claims on appeal by failing to advance arguments in support of them in the body of his brief
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 (i) is a corporation, limited liability company or limited partnership duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the state or jurisdiction of its organization, (ii) has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business as now conducted and as presently contemplated and, in the case of the Borrowers, to make the borrowings contemplated by the Financing Agreement, and to execute and deliver this First Amendment and each other Loan Document to which it is a party, and to consummate the transactions contemplated thereby, and (iii) is duly qualified to do business and is in good standing in each jurisdiction in which the character of the properties owned or leased by it or in which the transaction of its business makes such qualification necessary, except (solely for the purposes of this subclause (iii)) where the failure to be so qualified and in good standing could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Organizations
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: party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judg ment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). “In deciding a Rule 60(b) motion, a court must balance the policy in favor of hearing a litigant’s claims on the merits against the policy in favor of finality.” Kotlicky v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 817 F.2d 6, 9 (2d Cir.1987) (citation omitted). Moreover, Rule 60(b) motions are left to the sound discretion of the district judge. See Nat’l Petrochemical Co. of Iran v. The M/T Stolt Sheaf, 930 F.2d 240, 244 (2d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). “To prevail on a motion for relief pursuant Options: A. holding that motions to vacate a judgment are addressed to the sound discretion of trial justice B. holding that a motion to vacate a judgment under fedrcivp 60b is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court citations omitted C. holding that fedrcivp 60b motion premised on fraud on the court is available only to prevent a grave miscarriage of justice D. holding that motion filed under fedrcivp 60b properly construed as successive 2255 motion E. holding a motion to withdraw a guilty plea and grant trial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court and the supreme court will not upset the courts ruling unless there is a sufficient showing of abuse of discretion

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a motion to vacate a judgment under fedrcivp 60b is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court citations omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the parties. It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the conviction of Appellant Jack Davis be affirmed. Appellant challenges his conviction on several grounds, none of which has merit. First, appellant argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found in his car because FBI agents lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the car. In his opening brief, however, he argues only that his U-turn was legal; he does not challenge the district court’s finding that he failed to stop at the stop sign — a traffic violation that justified the stop. United States v. Mitchell, 951 F.2d 1291, 1295 (D.C.Cir.1991). Because he failed to challenge this ruling until his reply brief, appellant has waived this argument. PDK Labs. Inc. v. DEA, 438 F.3d 1184, 1196 (D.C.Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). Even were the issue properly raised, given Options: A. holding an argument made in plaintiffs reply brief but not in their opening brief waived B. holding that an argument raised only in fact section of opening brief and in reply brief is not properly raised C. holding that an argument raised in a footnote in an opening brief was waived as not properly raised D. holding that argument not raised in opening brief is waived E. holding an argument not raised in opening brief is waived

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an argument raised only in fact section of opening brief and in reply brief is not properly raised
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: Supplier shall indemnify, defend and hold Southwest harmless from any suit or proceeding brought against Southwest based on any claim that any Services, systems, article or apparatus, or any part thereof constituting Services furnished under this Agreement, as well as any device or process necessarily resulting from the use thereof, constitutes a violation of any law, rule, or regulation or an infringement of any patent, copyright or other Intellectual Property right in the United States of America or other jurisdiction Southwest operates commercial service as of the Effective Date and in the future. If notified promptly in writing and given authority, information and assistance, at Supplier’s expense, for the defense of same, Supplier shall pay all damages, costs and expenses incurred or awarded therein, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees. If use of any systems, article, apparatus, part, device, process, Service is enjoined, Supplier shall, at its own expense and in the following order, subject to commercial practicality, either: (a) procure for Southwest the right to continue using such Service, system, article or apparatus, part, device or process; (b) replace the same with a non-infringing equivalent (such modifications or replacement shall be functionally equivalent to the original and meet all applicable specifications) and make any modifications to any other Services necessitated by such replacement or modification. Supplier’s obligations under this Section 11.02 will not apply to the extent that the claim or adverse final judgment is finally determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be caused by (i) use of the Service in breach of this Agreement, if such infringement or misappropriation would not have occurred but for such breach, (ii) use of the Service in combination with other products not supplied or recommended by Supplier or specified by Supplier as being compatible with the Service, if such infringement or misappropriation would not have occurred but for such combined use; (iii) Southwest materially altering the Service (other than at Supplier’s direction), if such infringement or misappropriation would not have occurred but for such alteration; or (iv) Southwest’s use of a Service for a purpose not contemplated by this Agreement, if such infringement or misappropriation would not have occurred but for such use.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: injuries. 18. The DEA agents’ unreasonable search plan did not cause Villafranea’s injury. Villafranca, No. 3:06-CV-0806, slip op. at 3 ¶¶ 15-18. Because we hold that the district court’s finding that the agents’ alleged negligence was not the proximate cause of Villafranca’s injuries is not clearly erroneous, we need not re-visit the district court’s determination that the search plan was unreasonable. Villafranea now argues that a “new and independent cause” must arise from the conduct of an outside force and not from his actions in the incident. Thus, Villafranca urges that the district court’s findings on proximate cause were incorrect since the agents misconstrued his resistance. See Omega Contracting, Inc. v. Torres, 191 S.W.3d 828, 844 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 2006, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). The Government does not challenge this Options: A. holding that new and independent cause contemplates that an independent force rather than the alleged negligent acts of the parties was responsible for the plaintiffs injuries B. holding it is reversible error for a trial court to exclude a definition on new and independent cause an inferential rebuttal defense when supported by the evidence C. holding there was no independent tort cause of action between spouses for damages to the community estate D. recognizing a public policy against discrimination but not providing for an independent cause of action E. holding that a 1983 claim is an independent original action rather than a review proceeding even when it challenges an administrative action

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that new and independent cause contemplates that an independent force rather than the alleged negligent acts of the parties was responsible for the plaintiffs injuries
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 person executing this Contract, by his execution hereof, represents and warrants that he is fully authorized to do so, and that no further action or consent on the part of the party for whom he is acting is required to the effectiveness and enforceability of this Contract against such party following such execution.

assistant: 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: now appeals. II DISCUSSION Ms. Greene-Thapedi submits that the district court erred in dismissing the case. She contends that a reasonable fact-finder could determine that she did not receive the December 1997 deficiency notice for the 1992 taxable year, that the Government’s calculations of interest and penalties were incorrect and that these factual issues warranted further litigation in the district court. We cannot address the merits of Ms. Greene-Thapedi’s arguments because the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear this case. Under section 7422(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, a district court lacks jurisdiction over a refund claim that has not first been filed with the IRS. United States v. Dalm, 494 U.S. 596, 602, 110 S.Ct. 1361, 108 L.Ed.2d 548 (1990) (<HOLDING>); see also Bartley v. United States, 123 F.3d Options: A. holding that the trial court lacked authority to order a refund where the defendants case did not meet the specific statutory requirements authorizing a refund B. holding that the taxpayer met the claim requirement where the taxpayer first filed a timely letter with the irs that requested a refund and subsequently filed a formal refund claim C. holding under section 7422a that the district court lacked jurisdiction over a taxpayers refund claim because the taxpayer failed to file a refund claim before the statute of limitations had run D. holding that a taxpayer only has a refund right after the irs has credited the refund to other underpaid taxes therefore the refund was not part of the bankruptcy estate E. holding statute of limitations should not be equitably tolled for taxpayer who filed a refund claim after the applicable statute of limitations

assistant: The best answer is C. holding under section 7422a that the district court lacked jurisdiction over a taxpayers refund claim because the taxpayer failed to file a refund claim before the statute of limitations had 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: published in the First Quarter 10-Q were not forward-looking and therefore are not protected by the PSLRA’s safe harbor, nor by the bespeaks caution doctrine. Second, it cannot be said as a matter of law that the downgrade collateral estimates were immaterial. Rather, given the importance of liquidity to Constella tion’s merchant energy business (see Compl. ¶ 61 (citing Defendant Shattuck’s statement during the August 27, 2008 analyst meeting that “[t]he computation of downgrade collateral requirements is an important management tool”)), an investor would likely have viewed the figures in the First Quarter 10-Q as significant as part of the total mix of information available. See, e.g., In re Xcel Energy, Inc., Sec., Derivative & ERISA Litig., 286 F.Supp.2d 1047, 1056 (D.Minn.2003) (<HOLDING>). Contrary to what Constellation argues, the Options: A. holding that it is apparent that this act is not a revenue bill within the contemplation of said section of the constitution fpr the reason that the revenue to be derived therefrom is merely an incident to the main object of the bill and that its general purpose was not that of raising revenue id 5 B. holding that a company that derived revenue from leasing its property was in business for purposes for the coal act C. holding that a company that generated revenue from the sale of its assets remained in business D. holding of no prejudice based in part on fact that the protester had not demonstrated that it could have improved its proposal in any material way so as to raise its score or increase its advantage E. holding that bjecause xcel itself claimed that its trading business was an important part of its overall strategic plan a reasonable investor could have seen improper trades and artificially inflated revenue as material matters

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that bjecause xcel itself claimed that its trading business was an important part of its overall strategic plan a reasonable investor could have seen improper trades and artificially inflated revenue as material matters
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: Whether or not the Exchange is consummated, each of Source and the Company will bear their own respective expenses, including legal, accounting and professional fees incurred in connection with the Exchange or any of the other transactions contemplated hereby.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All of the direct and indirect Subsidiaries of the Company are set forth on Schedule 3.1(a) . The Company owns, directly or indirectly, all of the capital stock or other equity interests of each Subsidiary free and clear of any Liens, and all of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of each Subsidiary are validly issued and are fully paid, non-assessable and free of preemptive and similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. If the Company has no Subsidiaries, all other references to the Subsidiaries or any of them in the Transaction Documents shall be disregarded.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: for anything other than invasions of real property”); Martin, 699 F.Supp. at 170 (applying the principle of ejusdem generis to the personal injury definition of “other .invasion of the right of private occupancy” to determine that under Illinois law, it “provides coverage only if there exists a landlord-tenant relationship or if the plaintiff has a ‘vested property right’ ”); County of Columbia, 595 N.Y.S.2d at 991 (applying the principle of ejusdem generis to the personal injury definition of “other invasion of the right of private occupancy” to determine that under New York law, it is “limited to liability for purposeful acts aimed at dispossession of real property by someone asserting an interest therein”); Waranch v. Gulf Ins. Co., 218 Cal.App.3d 356, 266 Cal.Rptr. 827, 829 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Nichols v. Great Am. Ins. Cos., 169 Options: A. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property B. recognizing private right of action C. holding that the private right of action to which tribes agreed in the compact pertains only to visitors and is inapplicable to workers compensation disputes D. holding that under delaware law the policys definition of personal injury as wrongful entry or eviction or other invasion of the right of private occupancy applies only to damages incurred as a result of an invasion of an interest in real property E. holding that under california law policy language referring to wrongful entry eviction and invasions of the right of private occupancy pertains to torts against the real property of another

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that under california law policy language referring to wrongful entry eviction and invasions of the right of private occupancy pertains to torts against the real property of another
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 beneficial consumptive use made of the McCanne Ditch water for irrigation of the 300 acres of land. Id. at 56. Decrees for irrigation rights that erroneously determined tributary water sources to be “nontributary” or “independent of other priorities,” despite their tributary characteristics, are protected by res judicata as long as the water right is operated in conformity with the decree. See Closed Basin Landowners Ass’n v. Rio Grande Water Conservation Dist., 734 P.2d 627, 637 (Colo. 1987)(“A trial court has jurisdiction to render an erroneous decision, which may be reviewed on appeal. Consequently, a judgment entered within the jurisdiction of the court, even though wrong, is not subject to collateral attack.”); State Eng’r v. Smith Cattle, Inc., 780 P.2d 546, 549 (Colo.l989)(<HOLDING>). However, a change of water right application Options: A. holding that the doctrine of res judicata barred successive lawsuits by siblings asserting the same claims because the doctrine of res judicata bars both parties and their privies from relitigating an issue already decided B. holding that the doctrine of res judicata barred relitigation of an allegedly erroneous court determination that certain waters were not tributary to the arkansas river C. holding that res judicata prevents relitigation of a claim that was previously the subject of a valid and final decision of this court D. holding that because relitigation of issue was barred by collateral estoppel res judicata determination of finality of judgment dismissed for lack of standing was not relevant E. holding that the doctrine of res judicata applies to deportation proceedings

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the doctrine of res judicata barred relitigation of an allegedly erroneous court determination that certain waters were not tributary to the arkansas river
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: For purposes of this Agreement, (a) the words “include,” “includes” and “including” shall be deemed to be followed by the words “without limitation”; (b) the word “or” is not exclusive; and (c) the words “herein,” “hereof,” “hereby,” “hereto” and “hereunder” refer to this Agreement as a whole.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law , we do not warrant that ( i ) the services will meet your requirements , ( ii ) the operation of the services will be uninterrupted , virus - or error-free or free from other harmful elements or ( iii ) errors will be corrected .

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: On and after the date hereof, the Grantor will cause to be done, executed, acknowledged and delivered such further acts, conveyances and assurances as the Trustee shall reasonably request for accomplishing the purposes of this Aircraft Security Agreement; provided that any instrument or other document so executed by the Grantor will not expand any obligations or limit any rights of the Grantor in respect of the transactions contemplated by this Aircraft Security Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event that Law requires Novartis to pay or withhold Taxes with respect to any payment to be made by Novartis pursuant to this Agreement, Novartis shall notify Amgen in writing of such payment or withholding requirements prior to making the payment to Amgen and provide such assistance to Amgen, including the provision of such documentation as may be required by a tax authority, as may be reasonably necessary in Amgen’s efforts to claim an exemption from or reduction of such Taxes. Novartis will, in accordance with Law, withhold Taxes from the amount due, remit such Taxes to the appropriate tax authority, and furnish Amgen with proof of payment of such Taxes within fifteen (15) Business Days following obtaining the relevant payment certificate. If Taxes are paid to a tax authority, Novartis shall provide such assistance to Amgen as is reasonably required to obtain a refund of Taxes withheld, or obtain a credit with respect to Taxes paid. Further, the Parties agree that no gross up mechanism or similar type adjustment will apply to such net payment. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that Novartis unilaterally restructures the payment of any royalty or any other monies payable to Amgen under this Agreement such that Novartis or any of its Affiliates makes the payment of such royalty or any other monies payable to Amgen under this Agreement and solely as a result of such unilateral restructuring said amount is subject to withholding and further, Amgen is not able to recover or credit all or part of such withheld amount(s), Novartis agrees to compensate, without interest, Amgen for the corresponding economic impact of such non-recoverable or non-creditable amount. Such compensation must be made within a reasonable timeframe, upon request of Amgen. For the avoidance of doubt, the preceding sentence shall apply only in respect of a unilateral restructuring of payments by Novartis and shall not apply (x) in the event of a change in applicable Law or circumstance, (y) as the result of Amgen’s inability to recover or credit such withholding on a current or future basis due to Amgen’s taxable income (loss) position or other tax attributes in a given year, or (z) for any other reason beyond the exclusive control of Novartis.

assistant: Withholdings