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: CIT at —, 123 F.Supp.2d at 1371. Under the second interpretation, tied to the slightly more flexible “impede” or “avert” definition of “prevent,” an agreement would have to effectively counteract — without necessarily eliminating — price suppression. Id. The Court finds that Commerce’s interpretation of the statute is reasonable because it is in accord with the interpretation tied to the latter definition of “prevent,” and because, contrary to U.S. Steel’s suggestions, this interpretation creates a reviewable standard. How much price suppression is “significant” may be determined on a case-by-case basis. See SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194, 203, 67 S.Ct. 1575, 91 L.Ed. 1995 (1947); see also Fabrique De Fer De Charleroi S.A. v. United States, slip op. 01-82, at 21 (CIT July 3, 2001) (<HOLDING>). And any conclusion that an agreement prevents Options: A. holding that reinstatement in an age discrimination case lies within the discretion of the trial court after careful consideration of the particular facts of the case B. holding that the appropriate postpetition interest rate must be determined by examining the equities involved in a particular case C. holding defendant failed to rebut statutory presumption where evidence was not particular to the facts and circumstances of the case D. holding that a special relationship may arise from the factual circumstances of a particular case E. holding that commerce may reach a determination after examining the particular circumstances of the case without formally promulgating an allinclusive standard

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that commerce may reach a determination after examining the particular circumstances of the case without formally promulgating an allinclusive standard
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 persecutor attributed a political opinion to the victim, and acted upon the attribution, this imputed view becomes the applicant’s political opinion as required under the [INA].” Id. There is no evidence that suggests the Sendero Luminoso persecuted Cruz on account of an imputed political opinion. Indeed, Cruz fails to link his persecution to anything other than his status as a police officer. During their attack, the guerillas referred to Cruz as a “policeman” and “informer.” Neither of these references implies that the guerillas believed Cruz to hold political beliefs contrary to their own, much less that they attacked him because of such beliefs. While the guerillas may have regarded Cruz as an informant, this is not akin to imputing a political belief to him. See id. at 1489-90 (<HOLDING>). Substantial evidence therefore supports the Options: A. holding that applicant failed to establish imputed political opinion where he presented no evidence that an antigovernmental guerilla group imputed his fathers political beliefs to him B. holding that imputed political opinion is a protected ground C. holding that attempted conscription by a guatemalan guerrilla group did not constitute persecution on account of a political opinion where petitioner failed to show that the group was motivated by his political opinion D. holding that persecutors statements indicating that they had chosen her because of her fathers relationship to the philippine government constituted persecution on account of an imputed political opinion E. holding that fathers military service alone was neither political opinion nor sufficient to establish imputed political opinion

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that applicant failed to establish imputed political opinion where he presented no evidence that an antigovernmental guerilla group imputed his fathers political beliefs to him
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a reasonable duty on an employer who is aware of discrimination in the workplace to take reasonable steps to remedy it.” Vaughn, 459 N.W.2d at 634. Whether the employer met this duty is a question of fact and turns on “the gravity of the harm, the nature of the work environment, and the resources available to the employer.” Id. The first time Haskenhoff complained to management about Howes’s harassment, senior management promptly met with her and Howes. Howes was verbally confronted in a manner that led him and others to believe he faced termination. Howes apologized to Haskenhoff, and Haskenhoff, believing the harassment issue was resolved, asked that no further action be taken at that time. See Nurse “BE" v. Columbia Palms W. Hosp. Ltd. P’ship, 490 F.3d 1302, 1310 (11th Cir. 2007) (<HOLDING>). Haskenhoff made no further complaints to Options: A. holding harassing supervisor acted within scope of employment but employer was not liable because of its quick and effective remediation B. holding that summary judgment was properly granted in an employers favor because the employer promptly took remedial action reasonably calculated to end the harassment once it knew or should have known about a harassing coemployees behavior citing kopp v samaritan health sys inc 13 f3d 264 269 8th cir1993 C. holding that employer liability could arise under the principles of restatement 2192 if 1 the employer was negligent or reckless or 2 the employee relied on the supervisors apparent authority or 3 the supervisor was aided in his harassment by the existence of the agency relationship D. holding that employers are vicariously liable for harassment of employees unless employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior emphasis supplied E. holding that if employee did not want the harassing behavior reported or acted upon then the employer would not have been placed on proper notice of the harassment alterations in original quoting olson v lowes home ctrs inc 130 fedappx 380 391 n21 11th cir 2005

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that if employee did not want the harassing behavior reported or acted upon then the employer would not have been placed on proper notice of the harassment alterations in original quoting olson v lowes home ctrs inc 130 fedappx 380 391 n21 11th cir 2005
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: ALL MATTERS RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION, CONSTRUCTION, VALIDITY AND ENFORCEMENT OF THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE INTERNAL LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO ANY CHOICE OF LAW PROVISIONS THEREOF.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: In the instant case, Petitioner’s conviction became final on September 21, 1995, ninety-days after the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence. See Kapral v. United States, 166 F.3d 565, 575, 578 (3d Cir.1999); see Jones v. Morton, 195 F.3d 153, 157 (3d Cir.1999). However, because Petitioner’s conviction became final prior to the effective date of the AEDPA, the limitations period did not begin to run until April 24, 1996. See Burns v. Morton, 134 F.3d 109, 111 (3d Cir.1998)(allowing one-year grace period to petitioner’s whose convictions became final prior to the enactment of the AEDPA). Applying the one-year limitations period from that date, Petitioner was required to file his Petition by April 24, 1997. See Wilson v. Beard, 426 F.3d 653, 662-63 (3d Cir.2005)(<HOLDING>). Petitioner did not file the instant Petition Options: A. holding that federal rule of civil procedure rule 6a applies to the calculation of the aedpas oneyear limitations period B. holding that the aedpa oneyear statute of limitations applies to amendments to 2255 motions C. holding that aedpas oneyear period of limitations does not support a delay of filing of habeas petition by capital defendant D. holding that aedpas oneyear limitations period is not tolled during the pendency of a petition for certiorari to the united states supreme court that seeks review of a state courts denial of postconviction relief E. holding that former federal rule of civil procedure 6a and e applies to federal habeas petitions

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that federal rule of civil procedure rule 6a applies to the calculation of the aedpas oneyear limitations period
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall be deemed to exist as of the date the Certificate was filed, and the duration of the Company shall be perpetual unless and until the Company is dissolved in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.1 of this Agreement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in a continuing “general scheme” of drug procurement and distribution of which this shipment of heroin was a part. “Evidence of what the defendant did as a part of a plan or scheme of which the [drugs] he possessed was a part is the best available evidence of what he intended to do with the [drugs]” on this occasion. Rodriguez, 249 Va. at 206, 454 S.E.2d at 727. Accepting appellant’s account that his involvement in the scheme was limited to providing transportation from the bus terminal to Roanoke in exchange for a small quantity of drugs, such evidence was relevant to prove that appellant knew of the nature and presence of heroin and that he would receive a quantity of it in exchange for his assistance. See Moore v. Commonwealth, 25 Va.App. 277, 288, 487 S.E.2d 864, 869 (1997) (<HOLDING>). Such evidence proved a common scheme whereby Options: A. holding evidence insufficient to establish defendant had physical or constructive possession of heroin when no drugs were found on his person and the only drugs discovered on the premises which he shared with the codefendant were secreted out of plain view B. holding similar evidence sufficient to sustain a jury verdict of possession with intent to distribute cocaine C. holding evidence sufficient to prove possession of heroin with intent to distribute where defendant secreted heroin for another knowing of others intent to sell the heroin D. holding in part that defendant charged with unlawful possession of heroin marihuana and narcotics implements was eligible for a conditional discharge E. holding that evidence that the utilities at a residence where heroin was sold were listed in defendants name that an army identification card bearing the defendants name and other papers belonging to the defendant were located in the same bedroom where heroin was found and that a sixteenyear old obtained heroin from the house and sold it at defendants direction was sufficient to have the jury consider whether the defendant possessed the heroin under a theory of constructive possession

assistant: The best answer is C. holding evidence sufficient to prove possession of heroin with intent to distribute where defendant secreted heroin for another knowing of others intent to sell the heroin
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: 381 U.S. 129 85 S.Ct. 1322 14 L.Ed.2d 263 John PARROT et al.v.CITY OF TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA. No. 958. May 3, 1965. Jack Greenberg and Derrick A. Bell, Jr., for petitioners. Roy T. Rhodes and Edw. J. Hill, for respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Florida Circuit Court is reversed. Robinson v. Florida, 378 U.S. 153, 84 S.Ct. 1693, 12 L.Ed.2d 771. 2 Respondent asserts that the judgment below rests on an adequate independent state ground in that petitioners, through misunderstanding or oversight, failed to obtain certification of the Circuit Court record submitted with their otherwise timely petition for writ of certiorari in the Florida District Court of Appeal, First District. Petitioners tried to correct this nonjurisdictional defect (see, e.g., Aris v. State, 162 So.2d 670 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.)) when notified of it, but their petition was dismissed nonetheless. We do not find this procedural ground adequate to bar review by this Court. See Staub v. City of Baxley, 355 U.S. 313, 78 S.Ct. 277, 2 L.Ed.2d 302; NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 78 S.Ct. 1163, 2 L.Ed.2d 1488; NAACP v. Alabama, 377 U.S. 288, 84 S.Ct. 1302, 12 L.Ed.2d 325.

assistant: 2
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall, at any time and from time to time after the Closing, upon the request of Buyer, do, execute, acknowledge and deliver, and cause to be done, executed, acknowledged or delivered, all such further acts, deeds, assignments, transfers, conveyances, powers of attorney or assurances as may be reasonably required to sell, transfer, convey, assign and deliver to Buyer, or to aid and assist in the collection of or reducing to possession by Buyer, of the Purchased Assets, or to vest in Buyer good and marketable title to the Purchased Assets, free and clear of any and all Liens, except Permitted Liens.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: has not created a genuine issue of material fact to dispute the legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons the Foundation advances for her termination. In order to avoid summary judgment, the burden is on Anderson to bring admissible evidence to discredit the Foundation’s stated reason for her termination. Although Anderson conclusorily denies some of the performance-related charges against her, this is insufficient to defeat summary judgment. Anderson submits no evidence to rebut the Foundation’s performance-related charges. She offers only her own, conclusory, self-assessment, which the Fifth Circuit has held is insufficient to defeat summary judgment in the employment law context. See Grimes v. Texas Dept. of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, 102 F.3d 137, 139-40 (5th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>) (citations omitted); see also Molnar v. Ebasco Options: A. holding that defendants assertions of workproduct were not supported by competent evidence B. holding that unsubstantiated assertions are not competent summary judgment evidence C. holding that unverified pleadings do not constitute competent summary judgment evidence D. holding that unsubstantiated representations will not withstand summary judgment E. holding that hearing is appropriate when application contains assertions of fact that a petitioner is in a position to establish by competent evidence

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that unsubstantiated assertions are not competent summary judgment evidence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 2 . It appears an issue may be whether the appellant waived his right to remain silent by voluntarily talking to the police after he had initially invoked his rights. The Florida Supreme Court has held that the prohibition against commenting on a defendant’s right to remain silent does not apply where a defendant has waived the right. See Hudson v. State, 992 So.2d 96 (Fla.2008) (“Because Hudson waived his right to remain silent, gave interviews to police, and testified at trial, he has not invoked his right to remain silent, and testimony concerning his reluctance to implicate Mejia further was not improper comment on his right not to testify.”). We express no opinion on the matter. That is an issue which may be addressed on remand. See Braddy v. State, 111 So.3d 810 (Fla.2012) Options: A. holding that when a defendant initiates contact with the police after an assertion of a sixth amendment right to counsel defendant waives that right and his or her statements are admissible B. holding that a request for a lawyer requires the police to cease questioning until the accused consults with his or her lawyer unless the defendant initiates further conversation C. holding that where a criminal defendant has voluntarily and knowingly entered into a plea agreement in which he or she waives the right to appeal the defendant is not entitled to resentencing in light of booker D. holding that there is a threepart analysis for determining whether a defendant who has initiated further conversation with police after invoking his right to remain silent has waived that right the three requirements are 1 that the defendant initiates further conversation 2 that the defendant is reminded of his or her rights and 3 that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waives those rights a second time E. holding testimony that defendant had no response to question during police interview was not impermissible comment on his constitutional right to remain silent where defendant had voluntarily waived his miranda rights

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that there is a threepart analysis for determining whether a defendant who has initiated further conversation with police after invoking his right to remain silent has waived that right the three requirements are 1 that the defendant initiates further conversation 2 that the defendant is reminded of his or her rights and 3 that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waives those rights a second time
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: solely focus on timing; and (4) “the absence of a laches defense would lead to injustice.” Beaty at 923-26. However, the Court of Appeals did give a caveat to its application of laches. It held that although the “best reading of § 523(a)(3)(B) and Rule 4007(b) is that laches is available as a defense” in bankruptcy cases, “those provisions ... direct[ ] bankruptcy courts to be especially solicitous to § 523(a)(3)(B) claimants when laches is invoked, and to refuse to bar an action without a particu larized showing of demonstrable prejudicial delay.” Id. at 926. The Beaty court acknowledged that courts considering “at any time” language in other non-bankruptcy statutes have held that laches is not applicable to such actions. See Marshak v. Treadwell, 240 F.3d 184, 193 n. 2 (3rd Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); Heflin v. United States, 358 U.S. 415, 420, Options: A. holding that the statute of limitations for all of plaintiffs eleven causes of action including those brought under lanham act 43a 15 usc 1125a and lanham act 43c 15 usc 1125c is four years B. holding that reasonable anticipation standard for the tort of passing off under section 43a of the lanham act remains the law in the third circuit C. holding that section 43a of the lanham act protects trade dress D. recognizing that willful blindness is equivalent to actual knowledge under the lanham act E. holding that a laches defense is precluded under a section of the lanham act providing for cancellation at any time

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a laches defense is precluded under a section of the lanham act providing for cancellation at any time
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 2017-A Servicing Supplement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their permitted successors and assigns, and all such provisions shall inure to the benefit of the Owner Trustee on behalf of the Issuing Entity.

assistant: Binding Effects
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 two additional habeas claims on appeal, claims 1(F) and 1(C), deal with defense trial counsel’s failure to address the intent element in Oregon’s burglary statute. Claim 1(F) involves defense counsel’s failure to argue to the jury that Decker lacked the intent required for a criminal defendant to be convicted of burglary under Oregon law. Claim 1(C) involves defense counsel’s failure to request a jury instruction explaining the intent required for a criminal defendant to be convicted of burglary under Oregon law. The District Court excused Decker’s procedural default on claims 1(F) and 1(C) under Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1, 132 S.Ct. 1309, 182 L.Ed.2d 272 (2012) even though Decker failed to raise these claims in the state habeas proceeding as required by Oregon law. Id. at 1316 (<HOLDING>); State v. Robinson, 560 P.2d 758, 25 Or.App. Options: A. holding in a federal prisoners habeas case under 28 usc 2255 that the district court may raise the question of procedural default even if that defense was waived by the government B. holding habeas petitioners may show cause for such default in specific circumstances in states that require petitioners to raise iatc claims in initial state habeas proceedings rather than on direct appeal C. holding that a prisoners failure to pursue an appeal in state court is a procedural bar to federal habeas relief unless the petitioner shows both cause for failing to bring the state claim and actual prejudice from the failure to consider his federal claims D. holding that a federal court may excuse a state habeas petitioners procedural default if the petitioner can show cause for the failure to raise the claim and prejudice resulting from such failure E. holding that the novelty of a petitioners claim can constitute cause for a procedural default

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a federal court may excuse a state habeas petitioners procedural default if the petitioner can show cause for the failure to raise the claim and prejudice resulting from such failure
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: interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications within the territorial jurisdiction of the court in which the judge is sitting,” Id § 2518(3). “[I]nter-cept” is defined as “the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device.” Id. § 2510(4). We join the other courts of appeals that have addressed this issue in adopting the “listening post” theory that under Title III either the interception of or the communications themselves must have been within the judge’s territorial jurisdiction. See United States v. Cano-Flores, 796 F.3d 83, 87 (D.C. Cir. 2015), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 1688, 194 L.Ed.2d 790 (2016) (adopting the “listening post” theory and reas 2d Cir. 1992) (<HOLDING>). We need not determine whether a conversation Options: A. holding that a secretive interception has occurred unless both parties to the call had actual knowledge of the intrusion B. holding that it seems clear that when the contents of a communication are captured or redirected in any way an interception occurs at that time but also since the definition of interception includes the aural acquisition of the contents of the communication the interception must also be considered to occur where the redirected contents are first heard C. holding that the permissible scope of a search incident to arrest includes the contents of a cell phone found on the arrestees person D. holding that as to each predicate act the plaintiff must allege the time place and contents of the misrepresentations E. holding that the contents of a notebook were not protected speech based in part on the fact that appellant made no effort to communicate the contents of the notebook to the public

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that it seems clear that when the contents of a communication are captured or redirected in any way an interception occurs at that time but also since the definition of interception includes the aural acquisition of the contents of the communication the interception must also be considered to occur where the redirected contents are first heard
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: from the heading used in Gibson so as to put purchasers on notice that some or all of the fee paid for the extended warranty was going not to the warranty provider, but to Viking. We disagree. It should first be observed that the stated purpose of TILA is to give consumers a functional understanding of what exactly it will cost them to use credit, as well as to provide meaningful and accurate disclosures of costs associated with consumer credit purchases. See 15 U.S.C. § 1601. Plaintiffs have aptly observed that the sufficiency of TILA-mandated disclosures is to be viewed from the standpoint of an ordinary consumer, not the perspective of a Federal Reserve Board member, federal judge, or English professor. See Edmondson v. Allen-Russell Ford, Inc., 577 F.2d 291, 296 (5th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>); In re Cook, 76 B.R. 661, 664 (Bkrtcy., Options: A. holding that a credit transaction is not a consumer debt when it is incurred with a profit motive B. holding that the fcras provision that a lender may only use and obtain consumer credit information for the purpose of making a firm offer of credit requires that the lender offer something of value as an extension of credit alone C. holding that the proper perspective in analyzing tila disclosures is that of ordinary laypersons engaged in consumer credit transactions D. recognizing statutory credit E. holding that debt under the fdcpa is limited to liability arising out of consensual consumer transactions and not tortious activity

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the proper perspective in analyzing tila disclosures is that of ordinary laypersons engaged in consumer credit transactions
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 this title providing for the raising of an issue by a party in interest shall be construed to preclude the court from, sua sponte, taking any action or making any determination necessary or appropriate to enforce or implement court orders or rules, or to prevent an abuse of process," 11 U.S.C. § 105(a). 13 .Rule 60(b) enumerates grounds for relief from a final judgment, order, or proceeding. 14 . In North Carolina, each individual debtor is entitled to claim a maximum “homestead exemption” of $35,000.00 pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § lC-1601(a)(l). Pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1C-1601(a)(2), the debtor can apply any unused amount of the homestead exemption up to $5,000.00 to claim a "wildcard exemption” in any property. Any amount claimed as a wildcard exemption necessarily r 98) (<HOLDING>)). 17 . At the 2013 Hearing, the Male Debtor’s Options: A. holding that a debtor is required to claim any exemptions under north carolina law because north carolina is an opt out state under 11 usc 522b B. holding that north carolina court lacked personal jurisdiction over illinois bank even though some of its customers resided in north carolina and loan proceeds were used in north carolina C. holding that north carolina has jurisdiction over a claim arising from an accident in mississippi because the original offer of employment was accepted over the telephone while the employee was in north carolina D. holding that because north carolina has opted out of the exemptions provided under 11 usc 522d the exemptions available for bankruptcy debtors in north carolina depend upon the law of north carolina E. holding that a foreign subsidiary that is not registered to do business in north carolina has no place of business employees or bank accounts in north carolina does not design manufacture or advertise its products in north carolina and does not solicit business in north carolina cannot be subject to personal jurisdiction in north carolina even if some of the companys products do enter north carolina through the stream of commerce

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that because north carolina has opted out of the exemptions provided under 11 usc 522d the exemptions available for bankruptcy debtors in north carolina depend upon the law of north carolina
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: appeal, we do not discuss them. 11 . BLM misses this point when it argues that it has no NEPA obligation because that statute contains no provision that makes explicit mention of "wilderness characteristics.” It is true that NEPA does not mention "wilderness characteristics.” It would be surprising if it did so. NEPA is designed to apply broadly, to all sorts of federal activities. It is not a laundry list of factors to be considered and could not be. Instead, the factors to be considered are derived from the statute the major federal action is implementing, as well as from the nature of the action itself. It is, consequently, not at all unusual to review EIS’s with regard to consideration of factors not specifically mentioned in NEPA. See, e.g., Earth Island Inst., 442 F.3d at 1160-67 (<HOLDING>); Hells Canyon Alliance v. U.S. Forest Serv., Options: A. holding that settlement notice that failed to detail a distribution plan was not inadequate B. holding that bias decision was inadequate because it failed to offer even a cursory review of the record C. holding after consideration of a single significance factor that an eis was required D. holding that the rod and eis for a program were final agency action E. holding an eis for a forest project inadequate because it failed properly to consider tree mortality

assistant: The best answer is E. holding an eis for a forest project inadequate because it failed properly to consider tree mortality
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 Audited Financial Statements delivered (x) on the Closing Date, and (y) thereafter pursuant to Section 6.01(a) (i) were prepared in accordance with GAAP consistently applied throughout the period covered thereby, except as otherwise expressly noted therein; (ii) fairly present the financial condition of Holdings and its Subsidiaries as of the date thereof and their results of operations for the period covered thereby in accordance with GAAP consistently applied throughout the period covered thereby, except as otherwise expressly noted therein; and (iii) show all material indebtedness and other liabilities, direct or contingent, of Holdings and its Subsidiaries as of the date thereof, including liabilities for taxes, material commitments and Indebtedness.

assistant: Financial Statements
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 confirm his seed purchase from Palen was printed with the name “Tri State Seed Grain, Inc.” When Palen breached that contract, Olson notified Seed-link that he would not be able to perform under the Toulousaine contract. Olson has been clearly identified as the “ ‘one against whom the judgment was rendered.’ ” Aman Collection Service, Inc. v. Burgess, 612 S.W.2d at 408. The law from other jurisdictions also indicates that doing business under another name or several names does not create an entity separate and distinct from the person operating the business, and the person remains personally liable for all his or her obligations. Duval v. Midwest Auto City, Inc., 425 F. Supp. 1381 (D. Neb. 1977). See, also, Patterson v. V & M Auto Body, 63 Ohio St. 3d 573, 589 N.E.2d 1306 (1992) (<HOLDING>); Victor Auto Parts, Inc. v. Cuva, 148 Misc. 2d Options: A. holding that an action naming a state entity as a defendant did not constitute an action against the state because the state entity was sued in its capacity as receiver B. holding that a sole proprietorship was not a separate legal entity capable of being sued under ohio law C. holding sba is an integral part of federal government and is not a separate legal entity D. holding that if property is not property1 of the public entity then the public entity cannot be subject to suit under the dangerous condition waiver E. recognizing that the montgomery county department of correction and rehabilitation is not a legal entity capable of being sued

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a sole proprietorship was not a separate legal entity capable of being sued under ohio 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: deemed to be acceptable during the design stage. The state therefore waives immunity in an action to recover for injuries resulting from this failure to maintain. See, e.g., Springer, 13 P.3d at 802 ("[Tlhe waiver applies if the public entity allowed the condition of the building to fall from the general state of being, repair or efficiency at which the facility was originally built."); Swieckowski, 934 P.2d at 1385; Moldovan, 842 P.2d at 225. On the other hand, the state does not waive immunity for injuries that arise out of a dangerous condition which is inherent in the design of a highway-that is one which is intrinsic to the general state of being, repair, or efficiency of the road as initially constructed. § 24-10-108(1); Willer v. City of Thornton, 817 P.2d 514, 518 (Colo.1991) (<HOLDING>); Szymanski v. Dep't of Highways, 776 P.2d Options: A. holding that a contract for the design construction and installation of a water tank was predominantly a contract for the sale of goods under the ucc B. holding that the plaintiffs claim was moot because the construction project which was the subject of the dispute had been completed C. holding that whether clause in construction contract providing that no damages would be available for delay was enforceable was a factual question where there was evidence that damages resulted from unreasonable delay beyond the contemplation of the parties D. holding that the plaintiffs injuries were a result of the states failure to maintain and therefore finding a waiver of immunity under the cgia where the state allowed a rightofway fence adjacent to highway to fall into a state of disrepair thereby enabling a cow to run onto the highway and injure the plaintiff E. holding that there was no waiver of immunity under the cgia where the plaintiffs injuries resulted from a sharp dip in the roadway that was part of the initial design and construction of the intersection

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that there was no waiver of immunity under the cgia where the plaintiffs injuries resulted from a sharp dip in the roadway that was part of the initial design and construction of the intersection
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 outstanding principal balance of each Term Loan shall bear interest thereon from the Advance Date pertaining thereto at the Term Loan Interest Rate. Interest on the outstanding principal balance of each Term Loan shall be calculated daily on the basis of a 360-day year and actual days elapsed. All accrued and unpaid interest on all outstanding Term Loans shall be paid in arrears (i) on the date of, and from the aggregate amount of, any payment made to Lender pursuant to Section 2.1(d)(i) , below, and (ii) on the Term Loan Maturity Date. If, as of the last Business Day of any month, accrued and unpaid interest has not been paid in full pursuant to Section 2.1(d)(i) , below, such interest then owing shall compound and be capitalized and added to the principal amount of all Term Loans on each such date, until the principal amount of all Term Loans has been repaid or prepaid, and shall be due and payable on the date of repayment or prepayment, as applicable, of the unpaid principal amount of the Term Loans. For the avoidance of doubt, compounding and capitalization of interest as aforesaid shall not constitute a default for purposes of Section 9.1 until such interest shall fail to be paid on the date of such repayment or prepayment, as applicable. Any interest owing after the Term Loan Maturity Date shall be due and payable on demand.

assistant: Interests
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: b ) although all intellectual property rights subsisting in any user content will be owned by you or your licensors , you hereby grant skyscanner and its group companies a non-exclusive , perpetual , royalty-free , worldwide , transferrable and sub-licensable right to use , reproduce both electronically and otherwise , display , distribute , modify , adapt , publish , translate , and create derivative works from any and all such user content ( excluding personally identifiable information ) including for the purposes of advertising and marketing the skyscanner services and/or skyscanner platforms ;

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the complaint alleged that Yoo, as a Justice Department attorney, participated in policy decisions and rendered legal opinions that ultimately authorized federal officials to designate Padilla as an enemy combatant, take him into military custody, hold him incommunicado without access to the courts or counsel and subject him to both coercive interrogation techniques and harsh conditions of confine ment, in violation of his constitutional and statutory rights. Padilla and Lebrón acknowledge that at the time Yoo served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General at OLC, there did not exist a “single judicial opinion,” id. at 2083, holding that a United States citizen held in military detention as an enemy combatant possessed rights against the kind of 2, 102 S.Ct. 2452, 73 L.Ed.2d 28 (1982) (<HOLDING>); Hydrick v. Hunter, 500 F.3d 978, 989 (9th Options: A. holding that a prisoners right of access to the courts encompasses only a reasonably adequate opportunity to file nonfrivolous legal claims challenging his conviction or conditions of confinement B. recognizing a liberty interest in reasonably safe conditions of confinement C. holding that punitive conditions of pretrial confinement implicate due process D. holding prisoners constitutional right of access to courts guarantees only a reasonably adequate opportunity to file nonfrivolous legal claims challenging their convictions or conditions of confinement E. holding that mentally retarded individuals who are involuntarily committed to a state institution have a constitutional right to reasonably safe conditions of confinement under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment because pjersons who have been involuntarily committed are entitled to more considerate treatment and conditions of confinement than criminals whose conditions of confinement are designed to punish

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that mentally retarded individuals who are involuntarily committed to a state institution have a constitutional right to reasonably safe conditions of confinement under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment because pjersons who have been involuntarily committed are entitled to more considerate treatment and conditions of confinement than criminals whose conditions of confinement are designed to punish
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: is determined by the information possessed by the officer at the moment the force is employed. Waterman v. Batton, 393 F.3d 471, 477 (4th Cir.2005). A mistaken use of deadly force, however, is not necessarily a constitutional violation under the Fourth Amendment: “a mistaken understanding of facts that is reasonable in the circumstances can render a seizure reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” Milstead v. Killer, 243 F.3d 157, 165 (4th Cir.2001); see also Maryland v. Garrison, 480 U.S. 79, 87, 107 S.Ct. 1013, 94 L.Ed.2d 72 (1987) (“[T]he Court has recognized the need to allow some latitude for honest mistakes that are made by officers in the dangerous and difficult process of making arrests and executing search warrants.”); Henry v. Purnell, 501 F.3d 374, 382 (4th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). Before us, Officer Bullock vigorously Options: A. holding that the officer acted reasonably in shooting the decedent where the plaintiff did not directly counter the defendants evidence showing that the decedent matched the description of a suspect who threatened a victim with a knife was armed with a knife and ignored the officers instructions to drop it and jabbed it at the officer while taking steps toward him B. holding that evidence of recklessness by one officer in events leading up to shooting was immaterial in evaluating objective reasonableness of shooting officers decision to use deadly force in the situation he faced at time of shooting C. holding direct testimony tying a defendant to a gun was not required when the gun was found in the defendants truck and when the defendant had both ammunition for the gun and a rack in which it could have been kept D. holding that instruction on use of deadly force was not required where there was no evidence that decedent had attempted to assault appellant appellant could not retreat or that decedent was armed E. recognizing that shooting the decedent with a handgun when thinking it was a taser gun could be a reasonable mistake

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that shooting the decedent with a handgun when thinking it was a taser gun could be a reasonable mistake
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given (a) when delivered personally, (b) three business days after being mailed by first class certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, (c) one business day after being sent by a reputable overnight delivery service, postage or delivery charges prepaid, or (d) on the date on which a facsimile is transmitted to the parties at their respective addresses stated below.

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: Seller has all necessary corporate power and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement, and to perform all of the obligations to be performed by it under this Agreement. Seller has all necessary entity power and authority to execute and deliver the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, and to perform all of its obligations thereunder. The execution and delivery of this Agreement by Seller and the consummation by Seller of the transactions contemplated hereby and by the Assignment and Assumption Agreement have been duly and validly authorized by all necessary action of Seller, and this Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by Seller. This Agreement constitutes the valid and binding obligation of Seller, enforceable against it in accordance with its terms, except as such enforceability (i) may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, fraudulent transfer, reorganization, moratorium or other similar Laws of general application, now or hereafter in effect, affecting or relating to the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally and (ii) is subject to general principles of equity, whether considered in a proceeding at law or in equity (the “ Bankruptcy and Equity Exception ”). The Assignment and Assumption Agreement, when executed and delivered by Seller will constitute the valid and binding obligation of Seller enforceable against Seller in accordance with its terms, subject to the Bankruptcy and Equity Exceptions.

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: Any notice or communication required or permitted hereunder shall be given in writing or by electronic transmission, sent in the manner provided in Section 14.2 of the Second-Out Credit Agreement, if to the Mortgagee or to a Trustor that is a party to the Second-Out Credit Agreement, to the address set forth in the Second-Out Credit Agreement and, for any other Trustor, to the address specified in Section 7.11 , or to such other address or to the attention of such other individual as hereafter shall be designated in writing by the applicable party sent in accordance herewith. Any such notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given as provided in the Second-Out Credit Agreement for notices given thereunder.

assistant: Notices