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: toward accomplishing this end.” I believe that the focus in (i)(8) should not be on whether the murder furthered the escape. Whether a murder was committed to further an escape or to avoid an arrest is specifically addressed by Tenn.Code Ann. § 39 — 13—204(i)(6). The focus in (i)(8), however, is on the defendant’s status when the murder was committed. I believe that circumstance (i)(8) was codified to provide protection to society from escaped convicts who are less likely to be deterred by the prospect of further confinement from committing additional crimes. The danger Odom posed to society as a desperate escaped convict needing ase. The third prong encompasses a murder that occurs “during escape from lawful custody or confinement.” See State v. Workman, 667 S.W.2d 44, 49 (Tenn.1984) (<HOLDING>). If this language is construed only to Options: A. holding i8 applicable when a fleeing defendant killed officer who had arrested and escorted defendant from a wendys restaurant B. holding that the initial stop by officer was based on reasonable suspicion that defendant was impersonating a police officer although another officer arrested defendant for privacy act violation C. holding that plaintiff had not stated an equal protection claim where plaintiff had not alleged that the defendant treated him differently from anyone else who both had problems with alcohol and had been arrested D. holding that an officer may use deadly force when a fleeing suspect threatens the officer with a weapon E. holding a police officer who was pursuing a fleeing suspect was immune from his torts when he ran a red light and collided with plaintiffs vehicle

assistant: The best answer is A. holding i8 applicable when a fleeing defendant killed officer who had arrested and escorted defendant from a wendys restaurant
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: Any notice or other communication required or permitted hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be deemed given, effective, and received upon prepaid delivery in person or by courier or upon the earlier of delivery or the third business day after deposit in the United States mail if sent by certified mail, with postage and fees prepaid, addressed to the other Party at its address as shown beneath its signature in this Agreement, or to such other address as such Party may designate in writing from time to time by notice to the other Party in accordance with this Section 14 .

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: states and local jurisdictions that represent a large por tion of IACT’s hotel revenue. In addition, IACT continues to engage in a dialog with and receive feedback from certain state and local tax authorities. IAC will continue to monitor the issue closely and provide additional disclosure, as well as adjust the level of reserves, as developments warrant. The reserve balance at December 31, 2003 is $13.2 million as compared to $10.4 million at December 31, 2002. (Form 10-K, at 69 (Mar. 15, 2004).) Because IAC repeatedly warned the public that taxing authorities could force IAC to pay back taxes or pay more taxes in the future, further disclosure would not have “significantly altered the total mix of information made a off v. Duane Reade, Inc., 107 Fed.Appx. 250, 252 (2d Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Finally, it is worth noting that IAC Travel’s Options: A. holding that nyseg telling its investors that it would not compromise its financial integrity was not actionable under the securities laws B. holding that puffery is not actionable under the securities laws C. holding that misrepresentations about present state of mind are actionable as fraud D. holding fugitive past allowable time period under state law is actionable under section 1983 E. holding that accurate statements about past performance are not actionable under the securities laws

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that accurate statements about past performance are not actionable under the securities 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: error. Finally counsel points out that the court failed explicitly to tell Hanson that he was waiving his right to trial by pleading guilty. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(1)(F) (formerly Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(4)). The court misspoke and asked Hanson if he understood that he would be entitled to a jury trial if he had continued to plead guilty, rather than not guilty. This misstatement could not be plain error, however, because it is clear from the rest of the plea colloquy that Hanson understood that he was waiving his right to a trial by pleading guilty. See Maeder, 326 F.3d at 893. For these reasons we agree with counsel that the contemplated challenges to Hanson’s plea under Rule 11 would be frivolous. Counsel next addresses whether Hanson could make a nonfrivolous challenge t Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Franklin, 302 F.3d 722 (7th Options: A. holding that escape is categorically a violent felony under the acca B. holding that thirddegree burglary is a violent felony C. holding that escape from secure custody is a violent felony D. holding that burglary is violent felony E. holding that coerced sex is violent felony

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that coerced sex is violent felony
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: repealing act violated a prior constitutional provision virtually identical to Article 3, sec. 56 because it changed the city’s charter, the Court observed: From a reading of the entire section it is clear that its object and meaning is to prohibit the granting of special favors by the legislature, and to require that all legislation upon the subjects therein enumerated should be equal and uniform. It certainly did not mean to take away from the legislature its inherent power of repealing any law theretofore passed by it, and we must hold that said repealing act is a )(stating that adoption of a constitutional provision against special legislation does not prevent the repeal of previously enacted special law); Luehrman v. Taxing District of Shelby County, 70 Tenn. 425, 2 Lea 425 (1879)(<HOLDING>). We conclude that Article 3, sec. 56 does not Options: A. holding that the repeal of 921a30 did not affect the validity of the prior version of 2k21a4b which continued to reference the repealed 921a30 B. holding that a city charter is a law under the whistleblower act C. holding that a provision of the constitution is to be construed in the sense in which it was understood by the framers and the people at the time of its adoption but that if new products or circumstances that did not exist at the time the constitutional provision was enacted fall within the meaning of the provision the constitutional provision applies to them D. holding that legislation which repealed the charter of the city of jacksonville did not violate constitutional provision prohibiting local or special laws which change the charter of a city E. holding that constitutional provision which prohibited local and special laws did not limit legislatures inherent power to repeal the corporate privileges of a particular community and therefore act which repealed the charter of the city of memphis was not unconstitutional

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that constitutional provision which prohibited local and special laws did not limit legislatures inherent power to repeal the corporate privileges of a particular community and therefore act which repealed the charter of the city of memphis was not unconstitutional
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: facts in the present case were insufficient to establish that Sabia had “flaunted” the requirements of the Act. The Secretary asserts, however, that Bethlehem has been superseded, in light of the 1990 amendment to 29 U.S.C. § 666(a). Sabia, on the other hand, argues that Bethlehem continues to be “good law” and will continue to be binding precedent until overruled by this court en banc. We agree with the Secretary that Bethlehem does not control the disposition of this case. Although a panel of this court is bound by, and lacks authority to overrule, a published decision of a prior panel, see supra note 2, a panel may reevaluate a precedent in light of intervening authority and amendments to statutes or regulations. See United States v. Joshua, 976 F.2d 844, 853 (3d Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Bass, 54 F.3d 125,131 (3d Options: A. holding that decision by panel of this court is established precedent under rules of stare decisis B. holding that a panel is free to consider the sentencing commissions newly adopted interpretive commentary and based thereon reach a decision contrary to the holdings of prior precedent C. holding that one panel of this court is bound by the precedent of an earlier panel absent en banc reconsideration or a superseding contrary decision of the supreme court D. holding that a three judge panel is free to reexamine the holding of a prior panel when the supreme court has undercut the theory or reasoning underlying the prior circuit precedent in such a way that the cases are clearly irreconcilable E. holding that if a panel finds that a nlrb interpretation of the labor laws is reasonable and consistent with those laws the panel may adopt that interpretation even if circuit precedent is to the contrary

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a panel is free to consider the sentencing commissions newly adopted interpretive commentary and based thereon reach a decision contrary to the holdings of prior precedent
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 Seller nor any Subsidiary of Seller is a party to any agreement, instrument, or indenture or subject to any restriction materially and adversely affecting its business, operations, assets or financial condition, except as disclosed in the financial statements described in Section 13(a)(5) hereof. Neither Seller nor any Subsidiary of Seller is in default in the performance, observance or fulfillment of any of the obligations, covenants or conditions contained in any agreement, instrument, or indenture which default could have a material adverse effect on the business, operations, properties, or financial condition of Seller as a whole. No holder of any indebtedness of Seller or of any of its Subsidiaries has given notice of any asserted default thereunder.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Investor shall have all rights and remedies set forth in this Agreement and the Registration Rights Agreement and all rights and remedies which such holders have been granted at any time under any other agreement or contract and all of the rights which the Investor has by law. Any person having any rights under any provision of this Agreement shall be entitled to enforce such rights specifically (without posting a bond or other security), to recover damages by reason of any default or breach of any provision of this Agreement, including the recovery of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and to exercise all other rights granted by law.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the date hereof, the Company’s only Subsidiaries are set forth on Schedule 6(g) . The Company owns, directly or indirectly, all of the equity interests of the Subsidiaries free and clear of any lien, charge, security interest, encumbrance, right of first refusal or other restriction, and all the equity interests of the Subsidiaries are validly issued and are fully paid, nonassessable and free of preemptive and similar rights.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except for Roofstock, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, “ Roofstock ”), no investment banker, broker, finder or other intermediary has been retained by or is authorized to act on behalf of Seller or any Acquired Company who is entitled to any fee or commission in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. Seller is solely responsible for the payment of any commission, finder’s fee or other sum payable to Roofstock in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

assistant: Brokers
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: Lessor and Lessee each represent and warrant to the other that they have legal authority and all necessary consents to enter into, be bound by and perform under this Lease. Lessor represents and warrants that it has good and marketable title to the Premises, and that there are no third parties with any rights or interests in or to use of the Premises.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If, at the time of enforcement of the covenants contained in this Section 5.8 (the “ Restrictive Covenants ”), a Governmental Authority holds that the duration, scope or area restrictions stated herein are unreasonable under the circumstances then existing, the Parties agree that the maximum enforceable duration, scope or area reasonable under such circumstances will be substituted for the stated duration, scope or area and that the Governmental Authority will be allowed and directed to revise the restrictions contained herein to cover such maximum period, scope and area permitted by applicable Legal Requirement. Each Party has consulted with legal counsel regarding the Restrictive Covenants and based on such consultation has determined and hereby acknowledges that the Restrictive Covenants are reasonable in terms of duration, scope and areas restrictions and are necessary to protect, among other things, the goodwill of the Business and the substantial investment in the Business made by Buyer. Each Party further agrees that it will not challenge the reasonableness of the duration, scope and area restrictions in any Action with respect to the Restrictive Covenants, regardless of who initiates such Action.

assistant: Enforcements
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: Executive acknowledges and agrees that payments under Section 6.2 or 6.3 shall fully and completely discharge any and all obligations of Employer to Executive arising out of or related to: (a) Executive’s employment with, and/or separation from employment with Employer; and/or (b) this Agreement. The payment(s) made hereunder shall constitute liquidated damages in lieu of any and all claims which Executive may have against Employer or any of its officers, directors, employees, or other agents, except for any obligations under the workers' compensation laws including Employer's liability provisions. Therefore, notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no payments or benefits shall be owed to Executive under Section 6.2 or Section 6.3 unless Executive executes and delivers to Employer a release in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A (“ Release ”) within forty five (45) days following the Termination Date, and any applicable revocation period has expired prior to the sixtieth (60 th ) day following the Termination Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in counterparts (including by facsimile or electronic .pdf submission), each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which shall constitute one and the same agreement and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by each of the Parties and delivered (by telecopy or otherwise) to the other Party, it being understood that both Parties need not sign the same counterpart.

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: standard is not a shield which a defendant may use to avoid a conviction for a deliberately fraudulent scheme. We therefore reject Thomas’s argument that the foolishness of Pastor Holmes’s belief in Thomas’s fraudulent scheme somehow vitiates Thomas’s fraudulent intent. We refuse to accept the notion that “‘the legality of a defendant’s conduct would depend on his fortuitous choice of a gullible victim.’ ” United States v. Benson, 548 F.2d 42, 46 (2d Cir.1977) (quoting United States v. Pollack, 534 F.2d 964, 971 (D.C.Cir.1976)). Most circuits that apply the ordinary prudence and comprehension standard have already rejected some form of the “unreasonable victim” argument. See Gray, 367 F.3d at 1269-71; Coffman, 94 F.3d at 333; United States v. Coyle, 63 F.3d 1239, 1243-44 (3d Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); Drake, 932 F.2d at 864; United States v. Options: A. holding that a rico plaintiff must allege at a minimum the time place and content of the alleged misrepresentations on which he or she relied the fraudulent scheme the fraudulent intent of the defendants and the injury resulting from the fraud B. holding in a civil rico case based upon predicate acts of mail and wire fraud that the plaintiff must plead a material misrepresentation of fact that was calculated or intended to deceive persons of reasonable prudence and comprehension and that the plaintiff relied upon that material misrepresentation to establish the fraud statutes requisite scheme to defraud C. holding that the victims negligence is not a defense to criminal conduct D. holding that although fraudulent scheme must be reasonably calculated to deceive persons of ordinary prudence and comprehension the negligence of the victim in failing to discover a fraudulent scheme is not a defense to criminal conduct E. recognizing that a mailing must be sufficiently related to the fraudulent scheme to support a charge of mail fraud

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that although fraudulent scheme must be reasonably calculated to deceive persons of ordinary prudence and comprehension the negligence of the victim in failing to discover a fraudulent scheme is not a defense to criminal conduct
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to obstruct the ability of a commercial enterprise to make necessary adjustments in the face of economic challenges.” See Birkbeck v. Marvel Lighting Corp., 30 F.3d 507, 513 (4th Cir.1994). Neither was it designed to prevent leaders in the public sector from achieving the mix of employee expertise that will best fulfill an agency’s goals. B. Walker has thus proffered a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the termination decision. Appellants can meet their burden of proving pretext either by showing that Walker’s explanation is “unworthy of credence” or by offering other forms of circumstantial evidence sufficiently probative of age discrimination. Burdine, 450 U.S. at 256, 101 S.Ct. 1089; Dugan v. Albemarle County Sch. Bd., 293 F.3d 716, 721 (4th Cir 309, 314 (6th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). Also, when evaluating alleged age animus, we Options: A. holding that the statement that there comes a time when we have to make way for younger people is insufficient to create any inference of age bias because it is a stray remark which merely reflects a fact of life B. holding that a single implicit reference to the email in which the complaint makes no explicit reference to nor does it quote at all from is insufficient to establish that the email was incorporated by reference into the complaint C. holding that the reference to needing younger blood was insufficiently probative of age bias D. holding that reference to ordinance is not improper reference to an external document because injunction sufficiently describes the act sought to be enjoined and reference to the ordinance as stated in the injunction is merely to give further notice as to the enjoined conduct but the reference was unnecessary to give the appellants sufficient notice of that conduct E. holding that the dissipation of alcohol from a persons blood stream constitutes a sufficient exigency to justify a warrantless blood draw

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the reference to needing younger blood was insufficiently probative of age bias
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: Sections 7, 8, 10(d), 10(e), 11 and 12 (including Section 12(j) and 12(l)), together with any other provisions of this Agreement which, by their nature, require full or partial performance following the termination of this Agreement or Executive’s employment, shall survive and continue in full force and effect in accordance with their terms notwithstanding the termination of this Agreement and Executive’s employment for any reason.

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

user: In the event that you or any of your representatives received a request or are required (by deposition, interrogatory, request for documents, subpoena, civil investigative demand or similar process) to disclose all or any part of the Evaluation Materials, you or your representatives, as the case may be, agree to (i) immediately notify the Company of the existence, terms and circumstances surrounding such request,

assistant: No
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 our predecessor court. Id. As stated in Lellmann, “where a person is unjustly suspended in the exercise of official duty ... the party is entitled to whatever emoluments there might be due him during the time of such suspension.” Lellmann v. United States, 37 Ct.Cl. 128, 135 (1902). Thereafter, again before the Back Pay Act, the Court of Claims repeatedly held that the Civil Service Commission (the Board’s predecessor) had the authority to award back pay. E.g., Goodwin v. United States, 127 Ct.Cl. 417, 118 F.Supp. 369 (1954) (finding authority to mandate the payment of back pay, and stating that “the most important element of relief for wrongful demotion, next to restoration to his former status, was back pay”); Lamb v. United States, 116 Ct.Cl. 325, 90 F.Supp. 369, 375 (1950) (<HOLDING>). Congress, in enacting the Back Pay Act in Options: A. holding that back pay may be awarded to the date of judgment B. holding that the plaintiff was entitled to back pay for the differential between unemployment compensation received and the salary he would have earned if not terminated C. holding that reinstatement was insufficient to remedy a wrongful suspension and that back pay must be awarded as the amount he would have received had he been retained in his job during that period less any amount he might have earned elsewhere D. holding that plaintiff could not show that he was disabled because he conceded that he could do his job despite his impairment E. holding that plaintiffs allegations that he was improperly paid for appearances at arbitration proceedings that he received highly negative performance evaluations that he was harassed by being required to perform tasks outside his job description that he received shorter notice of his termination than other employees and that he was terminated in retaliation for his eeoc complaint each state a claim upon which relief can be granted under 1981

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that reinstatement was insufficient to remedy a wrongful suspension and that back pay must be awarded as the amount he would have received had he been retained in his job during that period less any amount he might have earned elsewhere
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) The proceeds of the Heartland Facilities shall be used to finance the Heartland Acquisition Costs and (b) the proceeds of the other Loans shall be used solely (i) to refinance existing Indebtedness and pay fees, costs and expenses related thereto (ii) to finance Acquisitions and the fees and expenses related thereto, (iii) to pay fees and expenses incurred in connection with this Agreement and/or (iv) for other lawful corporate purposes (including, without limitation, share repurchases).

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: request that the court recognize that White had been in detention pri- or to the sentencing and that he should be credited for time served at ACI. The district court, after hearing from the Probation Officer, declined that request because he did not have the authority to credit White for time served. II. The issue is not whether White should receive credit for the time spent at ACI before he was transferred to the custody of the INS, but whether the district court had the power to credit the time. It did not. It is settled law that under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), discretion to credit time served is vested in the Attorney General, through the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), and not in the sentencing court. See United States v. Wilson, 503 U.S. 329, 331-36, 112 S.Ct. 1351, 117 L.Ed.2d 593 (1992) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Morales-Madera, 352 F.3d 1, Options: A. holding that where a defendant receives a consolidated sentence or consolidated judgment under north carolina law it is one sentence and absent another qualifying sentence the career offender enhancement is inapplicable B. holding that a federal sentence commences when the attorney general receives the convicted defendant into custody for service of that sentence C. holding that an issue of ineffective assistance of counsel is rendered moot when a defendant receives an illegal sentence D. holding that under 3585b the bop has the responsibility of computing the amount of credit a defendant receives after defendant begins serving a sentence E. holding that a judge who imposes a more severe sentence after the original sentence is successfully attacked must affirmatively state objective reasons for the harsher sentence to ensure that vindictiveness against the defendant plays no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that under 3585b the bop has the responsibility of computing the amount of credit a defendant receives after defendant begins serving a 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: but rather whether there is at least one common question that will generate a common answer “apt to drive the resolution of the litigation.” Wal-Mart, 131 S.Ct. at 1225 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Wang, 737 F.3d at 544 (“[s]o long as there is even a single common question, a would-be class can satisfy the commonality requirement of Rule 23(a)(2).”). Here, the question of whether using the name-only matching logic assures maximum accuracy is such a question. See Acosta v. Trans Union LLC, 243 F.R.D. 377, 384 (C.D.Cal.2007) (common question of whether defendants maintained reasonable procedures to assure maximum accuracy satisfied commonality prerequisite); Clark v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., 2001 WL 1946329, at *2 (D.S.C. March 19, 2001) (<HOLDING>). Rule 23(a)(2) is satisfied for the FCRA Options: A. holding that the defendant conceded the accuracy of his prior convictions in his psi report by failing to object to the report B. holding that certain information on police blotter show up and arrest sheets and front page of offense report are public information C. holding that the plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a violation of the fcra based on extraneous information where it was alleged that the document included broad language regarding disclosure of the information the accuracy of the information the consequences of providing a false statement and the effect of a photocopy D. holding that question of what reasonable procedures if any have been set up by the defendants to assure maximum accuracy of the information contained in the consumer report including information regarding or related to bankruptcy among other questions satisfied the commonality requirement of rule 23a2 E. holding that the right of access to government information or sources of information within the governments control is not mandated by the first or fourteenth amendments

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that question of what reasonable procedures if any have been set up by the defendants to assure maximum accuracy of the information contained in the consumer report including information regarding or related to bankruptcy among other questions satisfied the commonality requirement of rule 23a2
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: ‘untutored devotion to the concept of neutrality can lead to ... results which partake ... of ... a passive, or even active, hostility to the religious.’ ” (quoting Sch. Dist. of Abington Twp., Pa. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 306, 83 S.Ct. 1560, 10 L.Ed.2d 844 (1963) (Goldberg, J., concurring))). 3 . Although appellants question the persuasiveness of the Court's dicta, we have an “obligation to accord great deference to Supreme Court dicta," absent a change in the legal landscape. United States v. Colasuonno, 697 F.3d 164, 179 (2d Cir.2012). 4 . We note that our holding is consistent with the Supreme Court's most recent jurisprudence addressing the Establishment Clause. See Town of Greece v. Galloway,-U.S.-, No. 12-696, 134 S.Ct. 1811, 188 L.Ed.2d 835, 2014 WL 1757828 (May 5, 2014) Options: A. holding that the towns practice of offering a brief solemn and respectful prayer to open its monthly meetings did not violate the establishment clause B. holding that the presence of a cross on the city insignia did not violate the establishment clause C. holding that establishment of christmas day as legal public holiday did not violate establishment clause D. holding no violation of federal establishment clause E. holding that the endorsing requirement does not violate the establishment clause

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the towns practice of offering a brief solemn and respectful prayer to open its monthly meetings did not violate the establishment clause
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: You hereby acknowledge that you have reviewed with your own tax advisors the federal, state and local tax consequences of receiving the Units. You hereby represent to the Company that you are relying solely on such advisors and not on any statements or representations of the Company, its Affiliates or any of their respective agents. If, in connection with the Units, the Company is required to withhold any amounts by reason of any federal, state or local tax, such withholding shall be effected in accordance with Section 16 of the Plan.

assistant: Tax 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: that Congress shall have the power “to exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever” over the District of Columbia and “to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful buildings.” U.S. Const, art. I, § 8, cl. 17. The then-governor of Texas signed two deeds ceding exclusive jurisdiction of more than 18,000 acres of land to the United States, with the reservation that the State of Texas retains concurrent jurisdiction only for service of civil and criminal process on the premises. The ceded land remains physically located within the geographic boundaries of Texas. See Adams v. Calvert, 396 S.W.2d 948, 949 (Tex.1965) (<HOLDING>). The Depot currently remains under the Options: A. recognizing howard holding that fiction of a state within a state has no validity to prevent exercise of power by state over federal area within its boundaries so long as there is no interference with federal jurisdiction B. recognizing federal enclave remains within geographic boundaries of state C. holding that the determination of the boundaries of a political subdivision of the state is a political question solely within the power prerogative and discretion of the legislature and not subject to judicial review D. holding that deputies who approached within 90 feet of a rural residence were not within the boundaries of the curtilage E. holding a 1 signature requirement as within the outer boundaries of support the state may require before affording political parties ballot position

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing federal enclave remains within geographic boundaries of state
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: Other than the First Waiver and Amendment, the Second Waiver and Amendment, this Third Waiver and Amendment and the Forbearance Agreement, no settlement, agreement or understanding (A) entered into with respect to the Finance Documents or (B) purporting to amend, modify or qualify the Finance Documents or to waive any rights or obligations set forth therein shall constitute a legally binding agreement or contract, or have any force or effect whatsoever, unless and until signed, or specifically agreed, pursuant to the terms and conditions of Clause 28.1 of the Loan 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Biotech Corp., 178 B.R. 34, 38-39 (Bankr.D.Mass.1995), held that a certificate of deposit which states on its face "nonnegotiable and nonlransferable” is a general intangible under Rhode Island law. Acknowledging that its holding was against the weight of authority, the court held that "[nonnegotiable, nontransferable certificates of deposit] are not instruments because they are not transferable in the ordinary course of business.” Id. at 39. However, the court made no factual finding as to whether in commercial practice such certificates are in fact transferred, but merely stated, "I do not agree that the 'realities of business practice' need be consulted.” Id. at 38; see also Bank IV Topeka, N.A. v. Topeka Bank & Trust Co., 15 Kan.App.2d 341, 807 P.2d 686, 691 (Kan.Ct.App.1991) (<HOLDING>); Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc. v. Bartow Options: A. holding that a certificate of deposit labeled nontransferable is not an instrument without making any inquiry into actual business practice B. holding out admission to practice law when not admitted to practice C. holding that a loan transaction is a business practice under the ucl D. holding certification is not an occasion for inquiry into the merits E. holding that the term manufacture applied not only to things made but to the practice of making to principles carried into practice in a new manner to new results of principles carried into practice

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a certificate of deposit labeled nontransferable is not an instrument without making any inquiry into actual business practice
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: worker visa process begins with a religious organization (the petitioner) filing an 1-360 Petition on behalf of the intended religious worker (the beneficiary). Id. at § 204.5(m). The petition is reviewed by the USCIS, and if it is approved, the beneficiary-religious worker can apply for a visa either from abroad or for adjustment of his or her status to a lawful permanent resident if he or she is already in the United States. If, as here, an 1-360 Petition is denied, only the petitioning party has the ability to appeal the denial, not the prospective beneficiary. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(iii)(B) (stating that those who have standing to appeal a denied petition does not “include the beneficiary of a visa petition”). See also Echevarria v. Keisler, 505 F.3d 16, 18 (1st Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); Gunduz v. U.S.C.I.S., Civil Action No. Options: A. holding that the approval of the petitioners 1130 petition did not permit him to remain in the united states B. holding that a 2255 petition seeking only reinstatement of the right to a direct appeal does not render any later petition a second or successive petition under the aedpa C. holding that a petitioner may amend a habeas petition rather than filing a second or successive petition when the first petition has not yet reached a final decision D. holding that the beneficiary of a form 1130 visa petition did not have standing to challenge a denied petition E. 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

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the beneficiary of a form 1130 visa petition did not have standing to challenge a denied petition
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 date of both the New Jersey Tort Claims Act amendment and the Supreme Court’s affirmance in State v. Michaels), would serve to bar plaintiff’s claim against these defendants unless plaintiff filed within the limitations period and satisfied the notice provision. Because plaintiff did not file her notice of claim until February 27, 1995, it would be untimely under this scenario. The court is puzzled as to why the individual defendants in opposing Newark’s motion to remand or to dismiss did not flag this issue. 13 . New Jersey courts have relied on this section of the Restatement in other contexts. See, e.g., Rubin v. Nowak, 248 N.J.Super. 80, 83, 590 A.2d 249 (App.Div.1991). 14 . With respect to criminal proceedings, see, e.g., Day v. Zubel, 112 Nev. 972, 922 P.2d 536, 539 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Greenberg v. Wolfberg, 890 P.2d 895, 904, n. Options: A. holding that because the claims were dismissed with prejudice there was a final judgment for purposes of appellate review B. holding that a dismissal in the interest of justice was a favorable termination for the purposes of a malicious prosecution action where the courts reasons for dismissing the criminal charges were not inconsistent with the innocence of the accused C. recognizing the inherent anxiety associated with pending criminal charges D. holding that the final termination of the criminal proceedings occurred when criminal charges were dismissed with prejudice rather than when the accused was released from prison pending a retrial E. holding that 1983 claims accrued when all charges were dismissed rather than a previous date on which the conviction was vacated on the theory that the charges remained pending until the dismissal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the final termination of the criminal proceedings occurred when criminal charges were dismissed with prejudice rather than when the accused was released from prison pending a retrial
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: form when it enacted §§ 537.600 to 537.650, RSMo.1978. Section 537.600 “expressly waived immunity for (1) torts arising out of governmental operation of motor vehicles; and (2) dangerous condition S.W.2d 2, 11-12 (Mo.App.1983) (finding no dangerous condition in absence of security guard from his post in hospital parking lot where plaintiff was raped; no allegation of physical defect of property was made). In the second line of cases, Missouri courts began relaxing the physical defect standard holding that the physical deficiency in a public entity’s property could constitute a dangerous condition if the dangerous condition was created by positioning various objects on the property and not by intrinsic defects in the property. See Alexander v. State, 756 S.W.2d 539, 542 (Mo. banc 1988) (<HOLDING>); Jones v. St. Louis Housing Auth., 726 S.W.2d Options: A. holding that where notice of deficiency fails adequately to describe the basis on which the commissioner relies for his deficiency determination burden shifts to the commissioner to prove the accuracy of the deficiency determination B. holding construction company had actual notice of dangerous condition that its employees created C. holding that a second deficiency notice issued for a taxable year was valid where it determined a deficiency in a different type of tax than did the earlier deficiency notice D. holding that contractor owed general negligence duty to thirdparty by dangerous condition contractor created on road E. holding that the negligent placement of a folding room partition at the foot of a ladder on which plaintiff was working created a physical deficiency which constituted a dangerous condition

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the negligent placement of a folding room partition at the foot of a ladder on which plaintiff was working created a physical deficiency which constituted a dangerous condition
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: in employment discrimination cases,” citing Haglof v. Northwest Rehabilitation, Inc., 910 F.2d 492, 495 (8th Cir.1990); Hillebrand, 827 F.2d at 364). Summary judgment is appropriate in employment discrimination cases only in “those rare instances where there is no dispute of fact and where there exists only one conclusion.” Johnson, 931 F.2d at 1244; see also Webb v. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 51 F.3d 147, 148 (8th Cir.1995) (quoting Johnson, 931 F.2d at 1244); Crawford, 37 F.3d at 1341 (quoting Johnson, 931 F.2d at 1244). To put it another way, “[b]e-cause discrimination cases often depend on inferences rather than on direct evidence, summary judgment should not be granted unless the evidence could not support any reasonable inference for the non-movant.” Crawford, 37 F.3d at 1341 (<HOLDING>); accord Snow, 128 F.3d at 1205 (“Because Options: A. holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if there is a genuine dispute about a material fact B. holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment C. holding that when there are no genuine issues of material fact summary judgment is appropriate D. holding that unsupported allegations or denials are insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact for purposes of summary judgment E. holding that an eeoc reasonable cause determination letter did not constitute evidence precluding summary judgment when the other evidence was insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment