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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Within the limitations of the Plan, the Board of Directors may modify, extend or assume outstanding Options or may accept the cancellation of outstanding Options (whether granted by the Company or another issuer) in return for the grant of new Options for the same or a different number of Shares and at the same or a different Exercise Price. The foregoing notwithstanding, no modification of an Option shall, without the consent of the Optionee, impair the Optionee’s rights or increase the Optionee’s obligations under such Option.

assistant: Modifications
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 offense is punishable by death if certain proof is introduced at trial. When an accused is charged, as here, with transporting a kidnapped victim across state lines, he is charged and will be tried for an offense which may be punished by death. Although the imposition of that penalty will depend on whether sufficient proof of harm is introduced during the trial, that circumstance does not alter the fact that the offense itself is one which may be punished by death and thus must be prosecuted by indictment.” Id. at 8. (Emphasis original.) The West Virginia Supreme Court has reached the same result in construing a similar state kidnapping statute. Pyles v. Boles, 148 W. Va. 465, 135 S.E. 2d 692, cert. denied, 379 U.S. 864 (1964); but see State v. Sewell, 342 So. 2d 156 (La. 1977) (<HOLDING>). Our determination that G.S. 14-39 creates a Options: A. holding that leaving the scene and failing to render assistance are separate and distinct offenses B. recognizing similar duties C. holding that a similar statute created separate offenses D. holding unanimity requirement not violated when charge stated two separate counts with two separate and distinct offenses in each case E. holding that a statute that created a counselorclient privilege should not be retroactively applied to records created prior to the statute because of the presumption against retroactivity

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a similar statute created separate offenses
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Obligors will, and will cause each of the Subsidiaries to, comply with all laws, rules, regulations and orders of any Governmental Authority applicable to it or its property, except where the failure to do so, individually or in the aggregate, could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect. Each Obligor will maintain in effect and enforce policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance by such Obligor, its Subsidiaries and their respective directors, officers, employees and agents with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: [the gun] and she did not report it stolen,” she ‘‘did not know he would take the gun” on the night in question. There is no indication in the record that Chambers received his girlfriend’s consent—whether explicit or implicit—to take the gun, and thus the only evidence before us suggests that Chambers “did not have access to [the] gun, absent engaging in conduct tantamount to taking it dishonestly or secretly.” Thornton, 2015 WL 4567780, at *7. Because the record suggests that Chambers’s girlfriend “was deprived of possession of the gun-without [her] consent,” Herman, 1996 WL 621028, at *1, and-in light of the binding authority of Jackson, we defer to the district court’s application of the enhancement in this case. Cf. United States v. Bates, 584 F.3d 1105, 1109 (8th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). IV For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the Options: A. holding that use of gun was attributable to defendant who aided and abetted armed robbery but never personally carried gun B. holding that because the repose period in question was eliminated before it expired it never operated to insulate defendants from liability and never vested defendants with any substantive rights C. holding direct testimony tying a defendant to a gun was not required when the gun was found in the defendants truck and when the defendant had both ammunition for the gun and a rack in which it could have been kept D. holding that evidence was sufficient to prove defendant constructively possessed the gun where although defendant denied ownership of the gun it was found near a knife of which defendant claimed ownership and where defendant was aware of the presence of the gun E. recognizing that a broad definition of stolen is consistent with the guidelines purposes and finding that the enhancement was properly applied where a defendant found a gun that was lost or mislaid by its owner who never authorized anyone to take the gun never sold it and never gave it away as a gift

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that a broad definition of stolen is consistent with the guidelines purposes and finding that the enhancement was properly applied where a defendant found a gun that was lost or mislaid by its owner who never authorized anyone to take the gun never sold it and never gave it away as a gift
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 period specified by the executive officers. The regulations deny courts this power. Basic principles of administrative law, including the Chevron doctrine, also require us to deny Zazueta-Carrillo’s petition. The BIA has interpreted immigration law to mean that voluntary departure periods begin on the date the BIA enters its order. Here, the BIA specified that Zazueta-Carrillo had to depart “within 30 days ,/toto the date of this order.” (emphasis added). The BIA later determined that Zazueta-Carrillo’s failure to depart within that thirty-day period violated the order. The BIA’s interpretations and applications of the immigration laws are entitled to deference when Congress’s intent is unclear. INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415, 425, 119 S.Ct. 1439, 143 L.Ed.2d 590 (1999) (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation marks and citations Options: A. holding contract with ambiguous terms should not be dismissed on pleadings B. holding that in the absence of a statutory definition a term should be accorded its ordinary meaning C. holding that where statute is ambiguous deference is appropriately accorded to agencys interpretation D. holding regulations entitled to chevron deference E. holding that the bia should be accorded chevron deference as it gives ambiguous statutory terms concrete meaning through a process of casebycase adjudication

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the bia should be accorded chevron deference as it gives ambiguous statutory terms concrete meaning through a process of casebycase adjudication
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: Immediately after the consummation of the Transactions to occur on the Spin-Off Date and immediately following the making of each Loan and the application of the proceeds thereof, and giving effect to the rights of indemnification, subrogation and contribution under the Collateral Agreement, (a) the sum of the debts and liabilities (including contingent liabilities) of Holdings and its subsidiaries, on a consolidated basis, will not exceed the present fair saleable value of the present assets of Holdings and its subsidiaries, on a consolidated basis, (b) the capital of Holdings and its subsidiaries, on a consolidated basis, will not be unreasonably small for the conduct of their business as such business is conducted or proposed to be conducted at such time, (c) Holdings and its subsidiaries, on a consolidated basis, will not have incurred, and will not intend to incur, or believe that they will incur, debts and liabilities (contingent or otherwise) including current obligations, beyond their ability to pay such debts and liabilities as they become due (whether at maturity or otherwise), (d) the present fair saleable value of the assets of Holdings and its subsidiaries, on a consolidated basis, will be greater than the total amount that will be required to pay the probable debts and liabilities (including contingent liabilities), on a consolidated basis, of Holdings and its subsidiaries as they become due (whether at maturity or otherwise) and (e) Holdings and its subsidiaries, on a consolidated basis, will be “solvent” within the meaning given to that term and similar terms under applicable laws relating to fraudulent transfers and conveyances. For purposes of this Section, the amount of any contingent liability at any time shall be computed as the amount that, in light of all the facts and circumstances existing at such time, represents the amount that can reasonably be expected to become an actual or matured liability.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise provided herein, all notices, requests, demands, consents, instructions or other communications to or upon Trustor or Beneficiary under this Deed of Trust shall be in writing and faxed, mailed, emailed or delivered at its respective facsimile number or address set forth below. All such notices and communications shall be effective (i) when sent by an overnight courier service of recognized standing, on the second Business Day following the deposit with such service; (ii) when mailed, first-class postage prepaid and addressed as aforesaid through the United States Postal Service, upon receipt; (iii) when delivered by hand, upon delivery; and (iv) when sent by facsimile transmission or e-mail, upon confirmation of receipt.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the mother’s explanation for how the hole was created, indicating that she had believed some other unstated version of events to be more plausible. However, DHR did not provide the juvenile court with evidence regarding that alternative version of events or supply the juvenile court with any basis for inferring that the unstated information necessarily indicated that the mother had created the hole while in the throes of some bizarre, erratic, or impulsive behavior due to a mental-health problem. Without such evidence, any conclusions the juvenile court may have reached as to what had happened and how those events pointed to the mother’s having a mental-health problem could be based only on speculation and conjecture. See In re Jertrude O., 56 Md.App. 83, 466 A.2d 885 (1983) (<HOLDING>). In the adjudicatory hearing, DHR did not Options: A. holding that juvenile court that determined child was not dependent had no jurisdiction to thereafter determine custody of child B. holding that the requisites for in loco parentis status are the actual care and custody of a child by a nonparent who assumes parental duties because the parent generally due to his or her absence is unable or unwilling to care for the child C. holding that a superior court can adjudicate a child as a child in need of aid based on the acts of just one parent D. holding that juvenile court cannot remove child from home and continue shelter care based upon speculative possibility that child had been or would be abused or harmed by parent E. holding that evidence was sufficient that child was removed under chapter 262 for abuse or neglect when record contained evidence that parent made no effort to contact child left at shelter and trial court made findings of immediate danger to childs physical health or safety in emergency temporary order

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that juvenile court cannot remove child from home and continue shelter care based upon speculative possibility that child had been or would be abused or harmed by parent
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: There is no action, suit, proceeding, investigation, or arbitration pending or, to the best knowledge of such Seller, threatened against such any Seller Party or any of their respective assets which may result in a Material Adverse Effect. Such Seller is in compliance in all material respects with all Requirements of Law applicable to such Seller. None of the Seller Parties is in default in any material respect with respect to any judgment, order, writ, injunction, decree, rule or regulation of any arbitrator or Governmental Authority.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: actions. b. The Court will Dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Title VII Disparate-Treatment Discrimination Claims to the Extent that They are Based on Discrimination Against Anglos Without Prejudice for Failure to State a Claim, Because the Plaintiffs do not Provide Circumstances to Make Plausible that the CCSD is an Employer That Would Discriminate Against Anglos. The Defendants suggest that there is a question whether “Anglos (presumably meaning non-Hispanic Caucasians) are a protected class,” for purposes of the Plaintiffs’ § 1983, § 1985(3), and Title VII claims. Motion to Dismiss at 15. Anglos are a historically favored group and are not a protected group for purposes of disparate-treatment discrimination cases. See Notari v. Denver Water Dep’t, 971 F.2d 585, 588-89 (10th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>)(quoting Livingston v. Roadway Express Inc., Options: A. holding that a white office was not similarly situated to a black officer who was charged with more offenses than the white officer B. holding that plaintiff who was iranian is a member of a protected class C. holding that a plaintiff in a reverse discrimination case need show only that he is a member of a protected group and whites are a protected group under title vii D. holding that a white male is not in a protected class for purposes of his discrimination claim because a white male is not a member of an historically favored group E. recognizing that plaintiff who is not actually disabled may still be a member of third protected class

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a white male is not in a protected class for purposes of his discrimination claim because a white male is not a member of an historically favored group
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: new value. 12 . Hanover asserts that the bankruptcy court also ruled in its favor on separate equitable grounds. Because we affirm the bankruptcy court’s application of the new value defense, we address Hanover’s equitable defense only to note that neither this court nor any other has recognized that such an equitable defense to a preference action exists. See Norwest Bank Worthington v. Ahlers, 485 U.S. 197, 206, 108 S.Ct. 963, 99 L.Ed.2d 169 (1988) ("[W]hatever equitable powers remain in the bankruptcy courts must and can only be exercised within the confines of the Bankruptcy Code.”) Even the single case that Hanover cites to support its equitable grounds defense provides it no support. See Kmart Corp. v. Uniden Am. Corp. (In re Kmart Corp.), 318 B.R. 409, 415 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.2004) (<HOLDING>). TRAXLER, Chief Judge, dissenting: Because I Options: A. recognizing the existence of antagonistic defenses does not require severance unless defenses are actually irreconcilable B. recognizing that cases have generally treated statutory exceptions from remedial statutes as affirmative defenses C. holding defenses concerning the contract as a whole must be referred to ah arbitrator while defenses to the arbitration provision itself are considered by the court D. holding that exceptions such as the act or omission of a third party to strict liability under section 13385 of californias water code are affirmative defenses E. holding that apart from threshold defenses such as lack of in personam jurisdiction service of process standing and the like the enumerated 547c preference exceptions are the ex elusive defenses to liability for an otherwise avoidable preferential transfer

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that apart from threshold defenses such as lack of in personam jurisdiction service of process standing and the like the enumerated 547c preference exceptions are the ex elusive defenses to liability for an otherwise avoidable preferential transfer
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 be clear , and without limiting the foregoing , you may not use , reproduce , distribute , prepare derivative works of , display or perform any linden content , whether modified by you or not , outside the virtual environment of the service except as provided in an applicable product policy or as expressly agreed upon in a written agreement with linden lab .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: with no valid tax deed issued. The Revenue Act also provides that a Certificate of Purchase may be cancelled and set aside in the event of a sale-in-error. A sale-in-error may be found on the basis of certain pre-sale events, including (1) the land should have been exempt from taxation, (2) the taxes were previously paid, (3) the description of the property was too vague and uncertain, or (4) the owner previously filed a bankruptcy petition so that the sale was prohibited by the automatic stay. In the event of a sale-in-error, the Certificate of Purchase must be surrendered by the tax purchaser and will be cancelled in exchange for a full refund. Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 120, ¶ 741 (1989). See also Richard v. Chicago, 80 B.R. 451 (N.D.Ill.1987) and In re Garcia, 109 B.R. 335 (N.D.Ill.1989) (<HOLDING>). In addition, the Revenue Act allows a tax Options: A. holding that a tax sale conducted after filing of petition in bankruptcy is void B. holding that a debtors entitlement to an exemption under 522d1 is determined as of the filing date of a bankruptcy petition C. holding that utility customers mailing of a petition did not constitute the filing of the petition as filing was not effectuated until the petition was received by the clerk D. holding that telephone call from debtors attorney did not constitute notice of bankruptcy filing because petition had not in fact been filed E. recognizing that any action taken in violation of the automatic bankruptcy stay is void and without effect

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a tax sale conducted after filing of petition in bankruptcy is void
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: assert that, in many of the class members’ cases, there was no “consumer transaction” because the debts arose from phy sician-patient transactions, and as such, Defendants are exempt from the OCSPA. Plaintiffs argue that the physician-patient exemption does not apply to Defendants. The OCPA’s physician exemption in the definition of “consumer transaction” is narrowly construed, and Ohio courts have rejected its application to non-physicians. See Summa Health Sys. v. Viningre, 140 Ohio App.3d 780, 749 N.E.2d 344, 356 (2000) (“While transactions with physicians are exempted from the CSPA, a transaction between a service provider such as a hospital and the consumer is not clearly exempted.”); Elder v. Fischer, 129 Ohio App.3d 209, 717 N.E.2d 730, 734-35 (Ohio Ct.App. 1st Dist.1998) (<HOLDING>); Thorton v. Meredia Suburban Hosp., 1991 WL Options: A. holding that antitrust claims arising out of an international commercial transaction were arbitrable despite the fact that they were not specifically mentioned in the arbitration clause B. holding that physicians were specifically excluded from the ocspa but hospitals were not so they must abide by the ocspa C. holding that this court can consider claims not specifically excluded by a coa D. holding that all claims submitted by defendant were false because they were acquired by kickback E. holding that because the record does not indicate that the extraneous documents or averments were excluded by the court we must assume that they were considered

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that physicians were specifically excluded from the ocspa but hospitals were not so they must abide by the ocspa
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of Appeals which have considered the constitutional question of whether the Fifth Amendment privilege provides protection for a witness once it has been determined that he has a reasonable fear of foreign prosecution have reached different conclusions. The Fourth Circuit and the Tenth Circuit have held that a fear of foreign prosecution is not a sufficient basis for invoking the Fifth Amendment privilege. See United States v. (Under Seal) (Araneta), 794 F.2d 920, 926-28 (4th Cir.) (the Fifth Amendment may not be invoked by a witness who fears foreign prosecution unless that foreign country also honors the privilege against self-incrimination), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 924, 107 S.Ct. 331, 93 L.Ed.2d 303 (1986) [hereinafter Araneta ]; In re Parker, 411 F.2d 1067, 1069-70 (10th Cir.1969) (<HOLDING>), vacated as moot sub nom. Parker v. United Options: A. recognizing that although the foreign action would resolve a central issue in the federal case because termination of the foreign case would not necessarily end the federal litigation the district courts stay order was not final B. holding that for a domestic corporation the foreign principal place of business does not count C. holding that fedrcrimp 6e would prevent disclosure of witnesss testimony to foreign officials thereby negating fear of foreign prosecution and alternatively that the fifth amendment provides no shelter against incrimination in a foreign jurisdiction where federal domestic immunity has been granted D. holding that the fsia provides the sole basis for obtaining jurisdiction over a foreign state in federal court E. holding that foreign states prosecution did not bar subsequent florida prosecution for same conduct

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that fedrcrimp 6e would prevent disclosure of witnesss testimony to foreign officials thereby negating fear of foreign prosecution and alternatively that the fifth amendment provides no shelter against incrimination in a foreign jurisdiction where federal domestic immunity has been granted
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 transactions contemplated hereby are consummated, the Lenders agree, severally but not jointly and subject to the provisions of Section 11.06(h) , to indemnify the Agent and the Collateral Agent (to the extent not reimbursed by the Borrower and without limiting the obligation of the Borrower to do so), ratably according to their respective Commitments (or if the Commitments have expired or been terminated, in accordance with the respective principal amounts of outstanding Loans of the Lenders), from and against any and all Indemnified Liabilities which may at any time (including without limitation at any time following payment in full of the Obligations) be imposed on, incurred by or asserted against the Agent or the Collateral Agent in each of their respective capacities as such in any way relating to or arising out of this Agreement or the other Loan Documents or any documents contemplated by or referred to herein or therein or the transactions contemplated hereby or thereby or any action taken or omitted by the Agent or Collateral Agent under or in connection with any of the foregoing; provided that no Lender shall be liable for the payment to the Agent or Collateral Agent of any portion of such Indemnified Liabilities resulting from such Person’s gross negligence or willful misconduct; provided , however , that no action taken in accordance with the directions of the Required Lenders shall be deemed to constitute gross negligence or willful misconduct for purposes of this Section. If any indemnity furnished to the Agent or Collateral Agent for any purpose shall, in the opinion of the Agent or Collateral Agent, as the case may be, be insufficient or become impaired, each of the Agent or Collateral Agent may call for additional indemnity and cease, or not commence, to do the acts indemnified against until such additional indemnity is furnished. Without limitation of the foregoing, each Lender shall reimburse each of the Agent and Collateral Agent upon demand for its ratable share of any costs or out‑of‑pocket expenses (including fees and disbursements of counsel) incurred by each of the Agent and Collateral Agent in connection with the preparation, execution, delivery, administration, modification, amendment or enforcement (whether through negotiations, legal proceedings or otherwise) of, or legal advice in respect of rights or responsibilities under, this Agreement, any other Loan Document, or any document contemplated by or referred to herein, to the extent that the Agent or Collateral Agent is not reimbursed for such expenses by or on behalf of the Borrower. The agreements in this Section shall survive the payment of the Obligations and all other obligations and amounts payable hereunder and under the other Loan Documents.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall not, and shall use its best efforts to ensure that no affiliate of the Company shall, after the date hereof, sell, offer for sale or solicit offers to buy or otherwise negotiate in respect of any security that would be integrated with the offer or sale of the Shares in a manner that would require the registration under the Securities Act of the sale of the Shares to the Subscribers.

assistant: Integration
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 Court concludes that, on these facts, Cox had no probable cause to justify Plaintiffs arrest. The Court further finds that no reasonable officer could have concluded that arrest of McDermott was proper in the circumstances. Although an officer is not required to follow every lead to determine that a suspect may be innocent before making a probable cause determination, an officer must have more than reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. See, e.g. Borlawsky v. Town of Windham, 115 F.Supp.2d 27, 29-30 (D.Me.2000) (citing United States v. Bonilla Romero, 836 F.2d 39, 46 (1st Cir.1987) (noting that probable cause does not require police officers to investigate every possibility of innocence and doing so burdens public safety); Kelley v. Myler, 149 F.3d 641, 646-47 (7th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); Ricciuti v. N.Y.C. Transit Authority, 124 Options: A. holding that police officers have no duty to further investigate once they determine that probable cause has been established including investigating any exculpatory evidence B. holding that although jury found officer not to have had probable cause for arrest officer was entitled to immunity because law was not clearly established as to circumstances in which officer found himself C. holding that there is no 1983 cause of action for false arrest unless the arresting officer lacked probable cause D. holding that once probable cause was established the officer was not required to investigate whether the person arrested was a victim acting in selfdefense or the aggressor in a domestic violence situation E. holding that once probable cause is established officer is not required to investigate further

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that once probable cause is established officer is not required to investigate further
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: offense; the maximum sentence is 10 years for each offense, which must run concurrently under Hale. By enhancing only one count and running it consecutively to the second count, appellant was sentenced to 12 years. This sentence exceeds the statutory maximum if both sentences had been enhanced under section 775.084 and run concurrently, or if neither had been enhanced and run consecutively. As such the appellant’s sentence violates Hale. Although appellant was not sentenced to the mandatory minimum of 5 years for the second offense, as explained in State v. Hill, 660 So.2d 1384 (Fla.1995), the requirement that sentences run consecutively is not limited to only the minimum mandatory portion of. a total sentence: The State argues that Hale and its predecessors, Palmer v. State A 1997) (<HOLDING>). Here appellant was sentenced as an habitual Options: A. holding that a district court commits reversible error when it sentences a defendant to less than the statutory minimum where no exception to the mandatory minimum applies B. holding that even if the minimum mandatory exceeds the statutory maximum the court must impose the minimum mandatory C. holding fifteen year hfo mandatory minimum sentences on the three robbery convictions were required to run concurrently with the twentyfive year nonhfo mandatory minimum on the murder sentence D. holding hfo mandatory minimum sentence for robbery must run concurrently with sentences imposed for nonhfo first degree murder convictions E. holding that the fifteen year minimum sentence imposed under section 924e does not violate the eighth amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding fifteen year hfo mandatory minimum sentences on the three robbery convictions were required to run concurrently with the twentyfive year nonhfo mandatory minimum on the murder sentence
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: Governing Law . This Agreement and the other Loan Documents, unless expressly set forth therein, shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the law of the State of New York (including Section 5-1401 and Section 5-1402 of the General Obligations Law of the State of New York), without reference to the conflicts of law principles thereof.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the Company and its Affiliates will deduct or withhold from any amounts owing to Executive any federal, state, local, or foreign withholding taxes, excise tax, or employment taxes (“ Taxes ”) imposed with respect to Executive’s compensation or other payments from the Company or any of its Affiliates or Executive’s ownership interest in the Company or any of its Affiliates or its parent (including, without limitation, wages, bonuses, dividends, the receipt or exercise of equity options and/or the receipt or vesting of restricted equity).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: attention of the panel. However, Defendant has now obtained and presented evidence that, assuming authenticity, shows he was indeed sentenced on the same date for both of his prior drug trafficking convictions. Based on this new evidence, and in light of defense counsel’s failure to assist Defendant in litigating this issue on direct appeal, we will depart from our general rule against considering on habeas an issue that was disposed of on direct appeal. Cf. United States v. Alvarez, 142 F.3d 1243, 1247 (10th Cir.1998) (noting that we will depart from the law-of-the-case doctrine “when the evidence in a subsequent trial is substantially different” or “when the decision was clearly erroneous and would work a manifest injustice”); Johnson v. Champion, 288 F.3d 1215, 1226 (10th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). The government further argues Defendant’s Options: A. holding that a prisoners failure to pursue an appeal in state court is a procedural bar to federal habeas relief unless the petitioner shows both cause for failing to bring the state claim and actual prejudice from the failure to consider his federal claims B. holding that it would be inappropriate to predict whether state law would foreclose state postconviction review of the petitioners habeas claim where the state permitted second or successive state petitions when the procedural bar would result in fundamental injustice C. holding it would be manifestly unjust to adhere to a clearly erroneous finding that imposed an unnecessary procedural hurdle on a state habeas petitioner D. holding that a petitioner should be permitted to seek habeas review in state court even if there were doubt that the states substantive law would permit a habeas petition E. holding that a state procedural default will not bar consideration of a federal claim on habeas review unless the last state court rendering a judgment clearly and expressly stated that its judgment rested on a state procedural bar

assistant: The best answer is C. holding it would be manifestly unjust to adhere to a clearly erroneous finding that imposed an unnecessary procedural hurdle on a state habeas petitioner
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 Transactions will not violate (i) the Governing Documents of any Loan Party, (ii) any Requirement of Law, or (iii) any term of any Material Contract binding on or otherwise affecting it or any of its properties, except in the case of clauses (ii) through (iii) to the extent such violations could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Neither the Information Memorandum nor any of the other reports, financial statements, certificates or other information (taken as a whole) furnished by or on behalf of the Borrowers to the Administrative Agent or any Lender in connection with the negotiation of this Agreement or delivered hereunder (as modified or supplemented by other information so furnished) contains any material misstatement of fact or omits to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; provided that, with respect to projected financial information, the Borrowers represent only that such information was prepared in good faith based upon assumptions believed by them to be reasonable at the time made and at the time so furnished.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: congressional intent in enacting the 1982 amendments. If we were to read the statute as the defendants invite us to read it, and hold that a death caused by fire could be punished under the first degree murder guideline but that a death caused by a bomb was to be punished more leniently, we could, no doubt, reach a semantically plausible result. However, such a reading would attribute to Congress a result that would be anything but realistic or rational. We decline to attribute such a result to the legislative branch. Congress understandably equated the killing of a human being by burning and the killing of a human being by explosion. Thus, we conclude that the court correctly applied the first degree murder guideline. See also United States v. Martinez, 16 F.3d 202 (7th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). 2. After determining the applicable Options: A. holding that the crime of attempted first degree felony murder does not exist B. holding that although premeditation is outside the heartland of seconddegree murder guideline upward departure from seconddegree murder guideline based on premeditation was improper because commission considered the defendants state of mind in assigning a higher base offense level to firstdegree murder than to seconddegree murder C. holding that murder guideline is appropriate when death results from arson but not reaching issue of whether first or second degree murder guideline is appropriate because the district court although initially applying the guidelines for first degree murder had departed downward pursuant to application note 1 to ussg 2a11 on the ground that the death was not caused intentionally or knowingly D. holding different rule applicable for conviction of second degree murder E. holding that indictment for murder in the first degree charges murder by whatever means it may have been committed regardless of the theory of murder presented to the grand jury

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that murder guideline is appropriate when death results from arson but not reaching issue of whether first or second degree murder guideline is appropriate because the district court although initially applying the guidelines for first degree murder had departed downward pursuant to application note 1 to ussg 2a11 on the ground that the death was not caused intentionally or knowingly
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: the company considers a `` repeat infringer '' to be any user that has uploaded user content or feedback to or through the service and for whom the company has received more than two takedown notices compliant with the provisions of 17 u.s.c. § 512 with respect to such user content or feedback .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The failure to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require at any time performance by any Party of any of the provisions hereof shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such provisions or to affect the validity of this Agreement, or any part hereof, or the right of any Party thereafter to enforce each and every such provision in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: `` streaming '' means a contemporaneous digital transmission of the material by youtube via the internet to a user operated internet enabled device in such a manner that the data is intended for real-time viewing and not intended to be downloaded ( either permanently or temporarily ) , copied , stored , or redistributed by the user .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Covington, No. 1:15-cv-399 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 26, 2017), ECF No. 202. The legislature elected under the racially gerrymandered 2011 districting plan has enacted a number of pieces of voting- and election-related legislation that have been struck down by state and federal courts as unconstitutional or violative of federal-law. See N.C. State Conference of NAACP v. McCrory, 831 F.3d 204, 214-15 (4th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 137 S.Ct. 1399, 198 L.Ed.2d 220 (2017) (mem.); Raleigh Wake Citizens Ass’n v. Wake Cty. Bd. of Elections, 827 F.3d 333, 352 (4th Cir. 2016); City of Greensboro v. Guilford Cty. Bd. of Elections, 251 F.Supp.3d 935, 939-40 (M.D.N.C. 2017); Cooper v. Berger, No. 16-cvs-15636 (Wake Cty. Super. Ct. Mar. 17, 2017) (three-judge panel) (stri 40, 37 L.Ed.2d 407 (1973) (<HOLDING>): In Vieth, Justice Kennedy’s controlling Options: A. holding that it is not within the province of any court unless expressly authorized by law to review the determination of the political branch of the government to exclude a given alien B. recognizing that standing doctrine is fundamentally rooted in respect for the separation of powers of the independent branches of government C. recognizing that tax policy choices are appropriately left to the political branches D. holding that claim premised on the organizing arming and disciplining of members of the national guard involved issue committed expressly to the political branches of government E. recognizing that when other branches of government are remiss in their constitutional duties the judiciary must act

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that claim premised on the organizing arming and disciplining of members of the national guard involved issue committed expressly to the political branches of government
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: there nevertheless are certain factors which cast doubt upon the propriety of such an W.Va. 368, 373, 489 S.E.2d 750, 755 (1997) (per curiam) (“An attorney occupies a position of trust with regard to his or her client.”); Committee on Legal Ethics of The West Virginia State Bar v. White, 176 W.Va. 753, 756, 349 S.E.2d 919, 922 (1986) (per curiam) (observing that, in a relationship between a client and his/her attorney, “[t]he client comes to the attorney trusting in his expertise and honesty”). In essence, an attorney is a repository of the client’s confidences, and the trust a client places in his/ her lawyer is so highly esteemed, and deemed so integral to a successful attorney-client relationship, that it has been afforded a status of privilege. See, e.g., W. Va. R. Evid. 501 (<HOLDING>); State v. Fisher, 126 W.Va. 117, 121, 27 Options: A. recognizing common law right of access to judicial documents B. recognizing a common knowledge exception C. holding that privileges and immunities clause protected right of noncitizen to engage in construction work and noting that the pursuit of a common calling is one of the most fundamental of those privileges protected by the clause D. recognizing common law privileges E. holding that a federal court may resort to state law analogies for the development of a federal common law of privileges in instances where the federal rule is unsettled

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing common law privileges
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: No Loan Party shall, nor shall any Loan Party permit any of its Subsidiaries to, at any time create, incur, assume or suffer to exist any Lien on any of its property or assets, tangible or intangible, now owned or hereafter acquired, or agree or become liable to do so, except Permitted Liens.

assistant: Liens
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: when returning the software subject to the limited warranty above , please send the original software only to the rovio address specified below and include : your name and return address ; a photocopy of your dated sales receipt ; and a brief note describing the defect and the system on which you are running the software .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 4 . Bardin testified that her net monthly Options: A. holding that the retroactive application of the child support formula in civil rule 903 to a period of years in which there was no existing child support order did not violate rule 903h2s prohibition on retroactive modification of arrears B. holding that child support should have been made retroactive C. holding that the act is retroactive D. holding that the act is not retroactive E. holding that cage has not been made retroactive by the supreme court

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that child support should have been made retroactive