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: the husband and wife are living apart, there is no presumption . . . that she has any authority to pledge his credit even for necessaries. The presumption is that she has in fact no authority.”); see also Pool v. Everton, 50 N.C. 241, 242 (1858) (explaining that a husband is not responsible for his wife’s necessaries where “a wife leaves the ‘bed and board’ of the husband without good cause”). In Forsyth Memorial, our Supreme Court revised the exception in light of the modem view of marriage as a “partnership of equality,” and concluded that “[t]he spouse seeking to benefit from the separation exception... must show that the provider of necessary services had actual notice of the separation at the time the services were rendered.” Forsyth Memorial, 342 N.C. at 622, 467 S.E.2d at 91 Options: A. holding that an attorneys services were personal services rendered or labor done under the predecessor statute to section 38001 B. holding that expert reports were not required to mention the defendant hospital because reports were based upon the actions of hospital physicians C. holding in a similar factual situation that the bankruptcy court had no jurisdiction because it had no actual or constructive possession of the letters of credit involved D. holding that defendant must prove when the services were rendered to establish that the new value exception applies E. holding that because the hospital had no actual or constructive notice that the parties were separated at the time services were rendered the separation exception did not apply

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that because the hospital had no actual or constructive notice that the parties were separated at the time services were rendered the separation exception did not apply
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: 104 S.Ct. 3405)). 27 . See Buford, 632 F.3d at 275-76, 2011 WL 447048, at *9 ("[EJxclusion is not the appropriate remedy when an officer reasonably relies on a United States Court of Appeals' well-settled precedent prior to a change of that law.”); United States v. McCane, 573 F.3d 1037, 1045 (10th Cir.2009) (“[TJhis court declines to apply the exclusionary rule when law enforcement officers act in objectively reasonable reliance upon the settled case law of a United States Court of Appeals."), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1686, 176 L.Ed.2d 179 (2010); Davis, 598 F.3d at 1264 ("[T]he exclusionary rule does not apply when the police conduct a search in objectively reasonable reliance on our well-settled precedent, even if that precedent is subsequently overturned 0 (11th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>), abrogated in part on other grounds by United Options: A. holding that defendants have a right to be present at voir dire B. holding that the right to have counsel present means the right to have counsel physically present during the interrogation not merely the right to consult an attorney by telephone C. holding that the constitutional right to be present is satisfied so long as the defendant is given an opportunity to register his opinions with counsel after juror questioning and is present when the exercise of strikes is given formal effect even if the defendant is not present when his lawyer actually exercises the peremptory challenges D. holding that the defendants right to presence was not violated where the defendant had been present in the courtroom while the venire members were questioned notwithstanding the fact that the defendant was absent later when his attorney made his strikes over the lunch hour because the defendant was present in the courtroom when the clerk gave the strikes effect by reading off the list of jurors who had not been stricken E. holding that the defendants were not denied their right to be present during the peremptory strike phase of jury selection where they were present during voir dire had a chance to confer with counsel before the jury was impaneled and were present in the courtroom when the peremptory strikes were given actual effect by the clerks reading off the list

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the defendants were not denied their right to be present during the peremptory strike phase of jury selection where they were present during voir dire had a chance to confer with counsel before the jury was impaneled and were present in the courtroom when the peremptory strikes were given actual effect by the clerks reading off the list
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 U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 368 U.S. 400 82 S.Ct. 430 7 L.Ed.2d 380 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDv.LAS VEGAS SAND & GRAVEL CORP. No. 38. Decided Jan. 15, 1962. Solicitor General Rankin, Stuart Rothman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come, for petitioner. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The respondent consented to the entry by the National Labor Relations Board of an order directing it to cease-and-desist from interfering with activities of its employees on behalf of a named labor organization 'or of any other labor organization.' The respondent further waived all defenses to the entry by the Court of Appeals of a decree enforcing said order. The Court of Appeals, sua sponte, struck the references to 'any other labor organization' whenever they appeared in the Board's order. 283 F.2d 26, 28. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the case is remanded with directions that a judgment be entered which affirms and enforces the Board order. Labor Board v. Ochoa Fertilizer Corp., 368 U.S. 318, 82 S.Ct. 344, 7 L.Ed.2d 312. 2 Petition granted. 3 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, dissents.

assistant: 9
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 and its Subsidiaries have filed all United States federal Tax returns and all other material Tax returns which are required to be filed by any of them and have paid all Taxes shown to be due and payable pursuant to said returns or pursuant to any assessment received by the Company or any such Subsidiary, except such Taxes, if any, (i) as are being contested in good faith and with respect to which adequate reserves required in accordance with GAAP have been set aside on the books of the Company or such Subsidiary, as applicable or (ii) to the extent that the failure to file such Tax returns or pay such Taxes would not result in a Material Adverse Effect. To the best of the Company’s knowledge, no Tax liens have been filed and no claims are being asserted with respect to any such Taxes other than liens for Taxes that (i) are not overdue by more than 30 days or (ii) are being contested in good faith and with respect to which adequate reserves required in accordance with GAAP have been set aside on the books of the Company or such Subsidiary, as applicable.

assistant: Taxes
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: voluntary statement. By defendant’s testimony, Owen was prepared to take a statement, but did not after learning defendant was unwilling and wanted to speak to an attorney. According to the State, Lacy allegedly attended two interviews with Troy where defendant made voluntary statements. Considering defendant’s testimony to the contrary that he made no statements during these interviews, that Troy wanted him to sign a written statement and choked and kicked him when he did not, Lacy was a material witness to the voluntariness of defendant’s statements. Obviously, the red-haired officer was a material witness as defendant alleged that the officer threatened him with a gun and greater abuse unless he cooperated and gave a statement. (See People v. Wright (1962), 24 Ill. 2d 88, 93 (<HOLDING>).) According to the State, a written statement Options: A. holding that the constitutional right to be present is satisfied so long as the defendant is given an opportunity to register his opinions with counsel after juror questioning and is present when the exercise of strikes is given formal effect even if the defendant is not present when his lawyer actually exercises the peremptory challenges B. recognizing that it is inevitable that law enforcement officials will in some cases reasonably but mistakenly conclude that probable cause is present and that in such cases those officials should not be held personally liable C. holding that the constitutional right to present a defense is not violated by the exclusion of a defendants proffered evidence where he is otherwise given the opportunity to present his defense and crossexamine the key prosecution witnesses D. recognizing constitutional right to be present when sentence is imposed E. holding that materiality of witnesses in coercedconfession cases is not limited to those physically present when a confession is actually made but extends as well to those who were present when the alleged illegal conduct took place

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that materiality of witnesses in coercedconfession cases is not limited to those physically present when a confession is actually made but extends as well to those who were present when the alleged illegal conduct took place
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: interpretation of the law.’” Ex parte Butts, 775 So.2d at 178 (quoting Ex parte Cranman, 792 So.2d at 405). We do not read this provision from Ex parte Cranman and Ex parte Butts, nor do we read any of the progeny of those cases, as holding that an innocent misrepresentation by a state agent falls outside the protection that for so long has been provided by our law to state officials and employees while acting within reason and in good faith in the discharge of their responsibilities to the public. If something more were not required in order for conduct to fall within the exception relied upon by Lewis, that exception would “swallow” the whole of the general rule of immunity itself. Any misrepresentation is beyond the authority of a state agent. Indeed, any misstep by 6-07 (Ala.2000) (<HOLDING>); Bayles v. Marriott, 816 So.2d 38 Options: A. holding that the plaintiff must show that there was a lack of probable cause for the criminal prosecution B. holding the same for malicious prosecution C. holding that a necessary element for malicious prosecution under virginia law is lack of probable cause D. recognizing tennessee law requires the absence of probable cause to maintain a malicious prosecution claim E. holding that a state agent was entitled to immunity notwithstanding the fact that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to return a verdict for malicious prosecution because malice for purposes of malicious prosecution can be based upon a lack of probable cause but such malice in law is not enough to satisfy the ex parte cranman exception for acts committed willfully maliciously fraudulently in bad faith beyond his or her authority or under a mistaken interpretation of the law

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a state agent was entitled to immunity notwithstanding the fact that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to return a verdict for malicious prosecution because malice for purposes of malicious prosecution can be based upon a lack of probable cause but such malice in law is not enough to satisfy the ex parte cranman exception for acts committed willfully maliciously fraudulently in bad faith beyond his or her authority or under a mistaken interpretation of the law
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 Seller agrees to indemnify the Buyer and to hold the Buyer harmless from any loss or expense that the Buyer may sustain or incur as a consequence of (i) a default by the Seller in payment when due of the Repurchase Price, Margin Deficit or Price Differential or (ii) a default by the Seller in making any prepayment of Repurchase Price after the Seller has given a notice thereof in accordance with Section 2.03 .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement shall terminate and be of no further force and effect upon the earlier of (a) the four (4) year anniversary following the Closing and (b) the date when all Registrable Securities have been sold or are available to be sold under Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act without regard to volume limits.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the domestic-relations exception to federal diversity jurisdiction applies. In concluding that the plaintiffs state identity-theft damages remedy in federal court “would modify the state court’s marital distribution, the Eighth Circuit relied on the statutorily required considerations that a divorce court must consider before dividing property and awarding alimony.” Id. (“These [identity-theft] remedies would essentially require that the federal court remove the label ‘marital debt’ and reallocate the debt division the sta trines, such as res judicata or collateral estoppel, may prevent federal plaintiffs from relitigating issues raised in a prior divorce proceeding, “but these are defenses rather than jurisdictional obstacles.” Jones v. Brennan, 465 F.3d 304, 305-06 (7th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). We therefore believe that the Eighth Options: A. holding that the determination by the probate court in the summary proceeding provided for by section 211516 revised code that assets should be included in an estate makes the question of title res judicata as between all parties to the proceeding but the judgment of the probate court may be attacked in a subsequent action by other interested persons who were not parties to the proceeding in probate court B. holding that a suit for compensatory and punitive damages against various probate judges for conspiracy to deprive the plaintiff of property during the probate proceedings was not barred by the probate exception or rookerfeldman abstention doctrine C. holding that probate exception does not apply where plaintiffs assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty seek in personam jurisdiction over defendants and do not seek to probate or annul a will D. holding that texass probate statute does not affect whether the probate exception to federal jurisdiction applies to a case E. holding that breach of fiduciary claim falls outside probate exception

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a suit for compensatory and punitive damages against various probate judges for conspiracy to deprive the plaintiff of property during the probate proceedings was not barred by the probate exception or rookerfeldman abstention doctrine
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: her two kids (id. at 426-27). Under these circumstances, the Government failed to meet its burden to show probable cause that Pacheco was likely to escape before a warrant could be obtained. United States v. Khan, 324 F.Supp.2d 1177, 1187 (D. Colo. 2004), Because the ICE officers lacked “reason to believe” Pacheco posed a risk of escape before they could obtain an administrative arrest warrant for his removal proceedings, his warrantless arrest violated 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2). See, e.g., Arizona, 132 S.Ct. at 2506 (“[ICE officers] may arrest an alien for being in the United States in violation of any [immigration] law or regulation, ... but only where the alien ‘is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained.” (emphasis added)- (quotation omitted)); Khan, 324 F.Supp.2d at 1187 (<HOLDING>). 3. Suppression Is Warranted Under the Fourth Options: A. holding felony escape in north carolina to be crime of violence under acca because escape presents risk of injury to others B. holding a failure to appear for sentencing constitutes an escape under the rule C. holding that khans arrest was in violation of 8 usc 1357a2 due to governments failure to show risk of escape D. holding attempt to rescue prisoner and assisting in escape to be crimes of violence because of inherent risk of force E. holding that necessity defense to escape did not require defendant to turn herself in and that escape is not a continuing offense

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that khans arrest was in violation of 8 usc 1357a2 due to governments failure to show risk of escape
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 PARTY HERETO HEREBY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY LITIGATION DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF, UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS GUARANTY OR THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS. EACH PARTY HERETO (A) CERTIFIES THAT NO REPRESENTATIVE, AGENT OR ATTORNEY OF ANY OTHER PARTY HAS REPRESENTED, EXPRESSLY OR OTHERWISE, THAT SUCH OTHER PARTY WOULD NOT, IN THE EVENT OF LITIGATION, SEEK TO ENFORCE THE FOREGOING WAIVER AND (B) ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IT AND THE OTHER PARTIES HERETO HAVE BEEN INDUCED TO ENTER INTO THIS GUARANTY AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS, AS APPLICABLE, BY, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE MUTUAL WAIVERS AND CERTIFICATIONS IN THIS SECTION 19 .

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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: first to pass upon the matter. Under the holding of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938), and its thrust upon this court by way of 28 U.S.C. § 1332, this court is empowered to decide state law questions that state courts have not yet resolved. Therefore, the fact that the Mississippi Supreme Court has not ruled upon facts similar to the ones at issue here does not prevent this court from addressing the matter. II. Plaintiff argues that this matter should be remanded to state court because garnishment is merely ancillary or supplemental to another action and cannot be removed from state court to federal court. Suffice it to say that Fifth Circuit jurisprudence is contrary to plaintiffs position. See Butler v. Polk, 592 F.2d 1293 (5th Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>); and Berry v. McLemore, 795 F.2d 452 (5th Options: A. holding that garnishment is a distinct civil action B. holding that each alleged defamatory statement constitutes a distinct cause of action C. holding that garnishment of wages is a deprivation D. holding that a garnishment proceeding is an action against the consumer E. holding that while the fourteenth amendment is directed against state action and not private action the state action requirement is met in a civil action where state law is applied whether by statute or common law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that garnishment is a distinct civil action
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: 425.17(d)(1). Thus, Dr. Yamanaka’s statements do not constitute unprotected commercial speech. Id. Second, Mebo has not shown a probability of prevailing on its UCL claims. See id. § 425.16(b)(1). It cannot establish a legally and factually sufficient prima facie UCL claim because Mebo cannot establish statutory standing, Cal. Bus. & Prof.Code § 17204, which requires economic injury caused by the unfair business practice, see Kwikset Corp. v. Super. Ct. (Benson), 51 Cal.4th 310, 322, 120 Cal.Rptr.3d 741, 246 P.3d 877 (2011). Mebo also has not pleaded sufficient facts to survive Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)’s particularity requirement. See Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 317 F.3d 1097, 1106-08, 1110 (9th Cir.2003); see also Kearns v. Ford Motor Co., 567 F.3d 1120, 1122 (9th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>). ■ 3.Because the district court’s grant of Dr. Options: A. holding that a plaintiff satisfied rule 9b by pleading which machines were the subject of alleged fraudulent transactions and the nature and subject of the alleged misrepresentations B. holding that heightened pleading standards of fed rcivp 9b apply to fraud elements of rico claim C. holding that the fact that federal rule of civil procedure 9b requires a heightened pleading standard for some claims but not for a section 1983 claim against a municipality means that the rules do not require a heightened pleading standard for such a claim D. holding that rule 9b applies to fca E. holding that californias ucl claims are subject to rule 9b pleading standards

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that californias ucl claims are subject to rule 9b pleading standards
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 aaa consumer arbitration rules ( `` aaa rules '' ) governing the arbitration are available online at www.adr.org or by calling the aaa at 1-800-778-7879 .

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: Accrued interest under this Note shall be due and payable in arrears on the last day of each Interest Period. The principal balance outstanding hereunder, together with all accrued interest and other amounts payable hereunder, if not sooner paid as provided herein, shall be due and payable on September 22, 2017.

assistant: Payments
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: Notices must be in writing and delivered by personal delivery, overnight courier, or certified mail, return receipt requested to the parties at their respective addresses set forth below, and will be deemed to have been given upon receipt. A copy of any notice sent to Dex Media must be sent to its General Counsel, as well, by personal delivery, certified mail or overnight courier, to the same address. Either party may change its notice address at any time upon not less than ten (10) days prior written notice to the other.

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: to be accorded to the evidence produced are matters within the province of the trier of fact, who is free to believe all, some or none of the evidence. Commonwealth v. Passarelli, 789 A.2d 708, 716 (Pa.Super.2001) (citations and quotations omitted). ¶ 5 A person is guilty of aggravated assault under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2702, Aggravated assault, (a)(1), “if he (1) attempts to cause serious bodily injury to another, or causes such injury intentionally, knowingly or recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.” The evidence presented in this matter showed appellant confronted Burger at a distance of a few feet and pointed a handgun directly in Burger’s face. (N.T., at 23, 50-51, 70, 104.) See Commonwealth v. Nichols, 692 A.2d 181 (Pa.Super.1997) (<HOLDING>). Appellant, an expert marksman, also fired a Options: A. holding intent may be inferred from large amount of marijuana B. holding specific intent to harm may be inferred from the circumstances and that finding is a matter for the jury C. holding intent may be inferred from all facts and circumstances D. holding that employers intent may be inferred through circumstantial evidence E. holding specific intent to cause serious bodily injury may be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon upon a vital part of the body

assistant: The best answer is E. holding specific intent to cause serious bodily injury may be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon upon a vital part of the body
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: 1350, 1356 (7th Cir.1992)) ("Because dismissal is harsh ... the bankruptcy court should be more reluctant to dismiss a petition ... for lack of good faith than to reject a plan for lack of good faith under Section 1325(a).”). The addition of § 1325(a)(7) by BAPCPA lends further support for the view that a more stringent test should be applied under § 1307(c). Under § 1325(a)(7), courts have authority to take the less drastic step of denying confirmation of a chapter 13 plan if the petition is not filed in good faith, rather than dismissing the case. See § 1325(a)(7) ("[Tjhe court shall confirm a plan if the action of the debtor in filing the petition was in good faith.”). 81 . See In re Gier, 986 F.2d 1326 (10th Cir.1993). 82 . In re Alexander, 363 B.R. 917, 925 (10th Cir. BAP 2007) (<HOLDING>). 83 . In re Cranmer, 697 F.3d 1314, 1318-19 Options: A. holding title company liable for bad faith B. recognizing conflict between circuits C. recognizing gier was to date the tenth circuits most comprehensive discussion of bad faith vis a vis 1307 D. holding that bad faith includes lack of good faith in investigating the facts of a complaint E. holding that a bad faith claim is a tort

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing gier was to date the tenth circuits most comprehensive discussion of bad faith vis a vis 1307
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: — and only if — the plaintiff shows discriminatory intent. See, e.g., Nieves-Marquez v. Puerto Rico, 353 F.3d 108, 126 (1st Cir.2003) (“[P]rivate individuals may recover compensatory damages under § 504 and Title II only for intentional discrimination.”); Delano-Pyle v. Victoria County, Tex., 302 F.3d 567, 574 (5th Cir.2002) (“A plaintiff asserting a private cause of action for violations of the ADA or the RA may only recover compensatory damages upon a showing of intentional discrimination.”); Powers v. MJB Acquisition Corp., 184 F.3d 1147, 1152-53 (10th Cir.1999) (district court committed reversible error in failing to instruct jury that plaintiff needed to show intentional discrimination to recover compensatory damages); Ferguson v. City of Phoenix, 157 F.3d 668, 674 (9th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); Wood v. President and Trustees of Spring Hill Options: A. holding that title ii of the ada is not applicable to the federal government B. holding that a plaintiff cannot bring an action under 42 usc 1983 against a state official in her individual capacity to vindicate rights created by title ii of the ada or section 504 of the rehabilitation act C. holding that title ii does not apply to the states D. holding that compensatory dam ages are not available under title ii or 504 absent a showing of discriminatory intent E. recognizing there is some confusion among the circuit courts as to the availability of damages under 504 of the rehabilitation act and without expressing an opinion on the matter noting that courts generally agree damages are available for violations of 504

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that compensatory dam ages are not available under title ii or 504 absent a showing of discriminatory intent
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: Expressly subject to the consummation of the Notified Financing and the receipt by Borrower of the proceeds thereof, PFG consents to the following payments from the proceeds of the Notified Financing: (1) payments not to exceed $485,000 to be made to holders of Borrower's Series E Preferred Stock, (2) payment not to exceed $370,000 to Rapid Medical Response, LLC in payment of a promissory note in favor of such person, (3) monthly payments of $25,000 to Tonaquint Inc. and (4) payment not to exceed $1,000,000 to repay the bridge loan to which PFG consented in the Prior Forbearance (such payments specified in clauses (1) through (4), the " Special Permitted Payments "). Additionally, PFG consents to (i) the Borrower's establishing a new class of preferred stock (the "Series G Preferred") with such designations, rights and preferences contained within the contemplated Certificate of Designations, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A , to be filed with the State of Delaware, (ii) the Borrower's issuance 18,848 shares of Series G Preferred to Tyumen Holdings, LLC, an entity controlled by Jeffrey Peterson, the Company's Chief Executive Officer and 24,372 shares of Series G Preferred to Jim Dalton, the Company's former Chief Executive Officer and a consultant to the Company (iii) the amendment of the Borrower's charter to effectuate the reverse split of its common stock as reflected in the amendment attached hereto as Exhibit B , and (iv) a lock-up period with respect to 10,800 shares of Borrower's common stock issuable to PFG under the terms of that certain Conditionally-Effective Warrant Cancelation Agreement between PFG and Borrower dated as of September 9, 2016, such lock-up period not to exceed six (6) months.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the rights and obligations hereunder shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of successors of the parties hereto. This Agreement and the rights and obligations herein may not be assigned or otherwise transferred, in whole or in part, by Voce without the express written consent of the Company.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No change or modification of this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the parties unless the change or modification is in writing and signed by the parties; provided, however, that the Company may change or modify this Agreement without the Participant’s consent or signature if the Company determines, in its sole discretion, that such change or modification is necessary for purposes of compliance with or exemption from the requirements of Section 409A of the Code or any regulations or other guidance issued thereunder. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, the Company may amend the Plan to the extent permitted by the Plan.

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: upon the interaction of individuals in a collective process.”). With regard to the Secretary’s second argument, although the Board found Mr. Arneson’s testimony “credible,” it also found the lapses in time between service and his first medical treatment “particularly significant” and “weighting] against his claim.” R. at 16-18. As Mr. Arneson argues, if the Board found his testimony concerning the continuity of his symptoms credible, such lapses in time would not weigh against his claim. The Board also stated that Mr. Arneson’s statements were “not competent medical evidence.” R. at 17. This is true. But if the Board found his testimony credible, Mr. Arneson would not need competent medical evidence to substantiate his claim. See Savage v. Gober, 10 Vet.App. 488, 495-96 (1997) (<HOLDING>); see also Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, Options: A. holding disability benefits from us civil service are community property B. holding that per 38 cfr 3303b medical evidence of nexus is not required for benefits if the veteran demonstrates continuity of symptoms between his present disability and service C. holding that section 511a of title 38 did not preclude a state trial court from requiring the payment of child support from va disability benefits because the state court was not reviewing the administrators decision finding the veteran eligible for specific disability benefits D. holding that 38 cfr 201106 as then worded was dispositive of the interpretation of 38 usc 1311 and required de novo determination of the veterans disability upon the entirety of the record including any new evidence presented by the surviving spouse E. holding that no federal nexus is required

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that per 38 cfr 3303b medical evidence of nexus is not required for benefits if the veteran demonstrates continuity of symptoms between his present disability and service
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 Executive's employment hereunder shall be effective as of the Effective Date and shall continue until the third anniversary thereof, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 5 of this Agreement; provided that , on such third anniversary of the Effective Date and each annual anniversary thereafter (such date and each annual anniversary thereof, a “ Renewal Date ”), the Agreement shall be deemed to be automatically extended, upon the same terms and conditions, for successive periods of one year, unless either party provides written notice of its intention not to extend the term of the Agreement at least 90 days' prior to the applicable Renewal Date. The period during which the Executive is employed by the Company hereunder is hereinafter referred to as the “ Employment Term ”.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Participant shall pay to the Company promptly upon request, and in any event at the time the Participant recognizes taxable income in respect of the RSUs, an amount equal to the taxes the Company determines it is required to withhold, if any, under applicable tax laws with respect to the settlement of the RSUs. Such payment shall be made in the form of cash, shares of Common Stock already owned or otherwise issuable as of the Settlement Date, or in a combination of such methods, subject to the terms of the Plan. In the event the Participant does not promptly pay to the Company an amount equal to the taxes the Company determines it is required to withhold under applicable tax laws with respect to the settlement of the RSUs, the Company shall offset such amount against any amounts, including shares of Common Stock, owed by the Company to the Participant, whether under this Agreement or otherwise, to the extent permitted by Section 409A.

assistant: Taxes
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 parties to this Agreement hereby agrees to waive its respective rights to a jury trial of any claim or cause of action based upon or arising out of this Agreement. The scope of this waiver is intended to be all-encompassing of any and all disputes that may be filed in any court and that relate to the subject matter of this Agreement, including contract claims, tort claims and all other common law and statutory claims. Each party hereto acknowledges that this waiver is a material inducement to enter into this Agreement, that each has already relied on this waiver in entering into this Agreement, and that each will continue to rely on this waiver in their related future dealings. Each party hereto further warrants and represents that it has reviewed this waiver with its legal counsel and that it knowingly and voluntarily waives its jury trial rights following consultation with legal counsel. THIS WAIVER IS IRREVOCABLE, MEANING THAT IT MAY NOT BE MODIFIED EITHER ORALLY OR IN WRITING (OTHER THAN BY A MUTUAL WRITTEN WAIVER SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO THIS SECTION 16(l) AND EXECUTED BY EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO), AND THIS WAIVER SHALL APPLY TO ANY SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS, RENEWALS, SUPPLEMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS AGREEMENT. In the event of litigation, this Agreement may be filed as a written consent to a trial by the court.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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: allows an alien to remain in the United States for a period of time without any defined legal immigration status.” Ukpabi v. Mukasey, 525 F.3d 403, 407-08 (6th Cir.2008). Here, the IJ provided Maldonado-Reyes with a five-month continuance to obtain counsel. When Maldonado-Reyes appeared without counsel and requested a further extension of time, he claimed that his boss had retained counsel for him, but counsel had not entered an appearance and Maldonado-Reyes did not know the attorney’s name and could not explain why the attorney was not present for the removal hearing. Under the circumstances, the BIA did not abuse its discretion in affirming the IJ’s denial of Maldonado-Reyes’s request for a further continuance. See Ramirez-Chacon v. Holder, 397 Fed.Appx. 179, 184-85 (6th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>); Al-Najar v. Mukasey, 515 F.3d 708, 717 (6th Options: A. holding that where the ij had previously granted continuance requests this reason alone is a sufficient basis to affirm the ij B. holding the immigration judges denial of a continuance request did not constitute an abuse of discretion C. holding no abuse of discretion where ij denied aliens request for continuance because alien had no immigrant visa available and it was unlikely attorney general would exercise discretion to permit excludable alien to stay D. holding that there was no abuse of discretion in allowing a defendants surprise fact witness to testify because the plaintiff did not request a continuance E. holding that the ij did not abuse his discretion in denying request for further continuance where the ij granted previous request

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the ij did not abuse his discretion in denying request for further continuance where the ij granted previous request
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: responded, ‘Yeah, and you’re right. You’ve reserved that issue for appeal ... if you need it, that’s right. That’s preserved.’ Id. At 1132.... I continue to believe that the record was more than sufficient to preserve the issue of the constitutionality of Mo. Stat. § 562.076 as construed by the Missouri Supreme Court. As I stated in my dissent: [A principal] reason for requiring proper preservation of issues at trial is so that the trial court is made aware of the contested issue and will have the first opportunity to correct an error. See Murray v. Carrier, 477 U.S. 478, 487, 106 S.Ct. 2639, 91 L.Ed.2d 397 (1986). Here, the objection was raised early in the proceedings, clearly notifying the trial court of the issue. See, e.g., State v. Barrington, 198 Mo. 23, 95 S.W. 235, 252 (1906) (<HOLDING>); State v. Flynn, 519 S.W.2d 10, 12 (Mo.1975); Options: A. holding that failure to make repeated objections is not ineffective when such objections would not have been sustained B. holding that a party waived its objections on appeal to an affidavit presented in support of a motion for summary judgment by failing to raise its objections to the trial court C. holding that the nature or character test set forth in code 192231 applies to both indictments and warrants and that since the amendment at issue in the case did not change the nature or character of the offense charged the trial court did not err in allowing the trial to proceed on the amended warrant D. holding that two general objections were insufficient to properly preserve the issue E. holding that issue is preserved if the objections at the trial were sufficiently specific to notify the trial court at the time of the nature and character of the objections and the reasons for them

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that issue is preserved if the objections at the trial were sufficiently specific to notify the trial court at the time of the nature and character of the objections and the reasons for them
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: inability to perform in the lower-level positions is not related. It was not the discharge from the dryer-feeder position that constituted the unfair labor practice, but rather the termination of the employees’ Laidlaw rights by removing them from the recall list and refusing to reinstate them to their former or substantially equivalent positions. Had the Board ordered reinstatement to the dryer-feeder position, § 160(c) would effectively prohibit such reinstatement. Because Webb did not have “cause” to terminate the three employees from the recall list and their right to eventual reinstatement to their pre-strike position or its substantial equivalent, the Board can order reinstatement as a remedy for that violation of Sections 8(a)(1) and (3). Woodlawn Hospital, 596 F.2d at 1344 (<HOLDING>). IV. In sum, we uphold the determination of Options: A. holding that there can be no violation of 1986 without a predicate violation of 1985 B. holding that no monell claim can lie where a court finds no constitutional violation C. recognizing that where the board properly finds a violation of the act it can order reinstatement under its remedial powers granted by 160c although finding no violation of the act here D. holding no violation of the travel act E. holding a violation of the travel act

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that where the board properly finds a violation of the act it can order reinstatement under its remedial powers granted by 160c although finding no violation of the act here
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: For the purposes of this Agreement, notices and all other communications provided for in the Agreement (other than a Notice of Termination) shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when personally delivered or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to the respective addresses last given by each party to the other, provided that all notices to the Company shall be directed to the attention of the Chief Executive Officer with a copy to the General Counsel. All notices and communications shall be deemed to have been received on the date of delivery thereof or on the third business day after the mailing thereof, except that notice of change of address shall be effective only upon 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Employment Period, the Executive shall serve as President, Drainage Pipe & Products of the Company and shall report directly to the Company's Chief Executive Officer. During the Employment Period, the Executive shall also serve in such other capacities as may be reasonably requested from time to time by the Board or the Chief Executive Officer that are consistent with the Executive's position and shall render such other services for the Company as the Board or the Chief Executive Officer may from time to time reasonably request and as shall be consistent with the Executive's position and responsibilities.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No member of the Committee shall be liable for any action, failure to act, determination or interpretation made in good faith with respect to the Plan or any transaction hereunder. The Company hereby agrees to indemnify each member of the Committee for all costs and expenses and, to the extent permitted by applicable law, any liability incurred in connection with defending against, responding to, negotiating for the settlement of or otherwise dealing with any claim, cause of action or dispute of any kind arising in connection with any actions in administering the Plan or in authorizing or denying authorization to any transaction hereunder.

assistant: Indemnifications