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: of bankruptcy.” Further, as in Northern Pipeline, each claim, including each Association counter-claim, presents a matter — the condominium form of real estate ownership and relations among the participants in that form of ownership — singularly and emphatically, preeminently and pervasively) governed by Florida law. To the governance of the condominium form of real estate ownership and those participating, the federal bankruptcy law is an awkward and unwelcome intruder. Each claim is a non-core proceeding. Accord In re Toledo, 170 F.3d at 1350 (finding a proceeding non-core that “sought to vindicate state-created common-law rights but did not utilize any process specially established by the Bankruptcy Code”); In re Happy Hocker Pawn Shop, Inc., 212 Fed.Appx. 811 (11th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>); Lauer, 288 B.R. at 276-77 (finding the Options: A. holding that a proceeding that by its nature could arise only in the context of a bankruptcy case is a core matter subject to the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court B. holding that when a state files a proof of claim in a bankruptcy proceeding the state waives its eleventh amendment immunity with regard to the bankruptcy estates claims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the states claim C. holding that the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over counterclaims asserted by the bankruptcy estate against a creditor where the claim is a state law action independent of the federal bankruptcy law and not necessarily resolvable by a ruling on the creditors proof of claim in the bankruptcy emphasis added D. holding that each state law claim was a noncore proceeding in part because no claim invoked a substantive right created by bankruptcy law and each claim could arise outside of bankruptcy law E. holding civil rico claim stemming from diversion of trust funds noncore because the claim does not invoke a substantive right created by federal bankruptcy law and this is a claim that could exist outside of the bankruptcy context

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that each state law claim was a noncore proceeding in part because no claim invoked a substantive right created by bankruptcy law and each claim could arise outside of bankruptcy 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: also argue that even if Plaintiffs had asserted a cognizable claim under Michigan law, that claim must fail because it is preempted by the First Amendment. The Court agrees. The First Amendment protects expressive works from right of publicity actions unless the use of the plaintiffs identity (or, in this case, distinctive sound) “is ‘wholly unrelated’ to the content of the work or was ‘simply a disguised commercial advertisement for the sale of goods.’ ” Parks, 329 F.3d at 461 (citing Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994, 1004 (2d Cir.1989)). A threshold question, then, is whether the Game constitutes an expressive work. Numerous courts have held that video games are expressive works protected by the First Amendment. See, e.g., James v. Meow Media, Inc., 300 F.3d 683, 696 (6th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>); E.S.S. Entm’t 2000, Inc. v. Rock Star Videos, Options: A. holding that the first amendment protects the right to criticize a grand jury investigation B. holding miranda violation does not invalidate consent to search as fifth amendment only protects testimonial and communicative evidence C. holding that the first amendment protects communicative aspects of video games D. holding that a video game clearly qualifies as an artistic work entitled to first amendment protection E. holding that the video games at issue are expressive and qualify as speech for purposes of the first amendment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the first amendment protects communicative aspects of video games
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: (1) shall be and is hereby declared to be a body corporate and, as such and by the names designated in this section, may hold property for the use of the university which it governs, be a party to all suits and contracts, and do all things lawfully appertaining to such university in like manner as municipal corporations of this state. § 2&40-104(l)(a), 7 C.R.S. (1997). This declaration, analogizing UNC to a municipal corporation, tends to support the conclusion that UNC is comparable to a municipality and therefore not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Monell, 436 U.S. at 690, 98 S.Ct. at 2035 (concluding that Congress did intend municipalities and other local government units to be included among those persons to whom § 1983 applies); see also Simon, 946 P.2d at 1305 (<HOLDING>). However, there is a wealth of authority that Options: A. holding that government entities may not assert qualified immunity B. holding that the mitchell rationale applies to claims of eleventh amendment immunity made by states and state entities C. holding that the new mexico school district and their governing boards are not arms of the state entitled to eleventh amendment immunity D. holding that notice statute applies to both municipal entities and employees of municipal entities acting within the scope of their employment E. recognizing that the supreme court in mount healthy and lake country concluded that the entities were not arms of the state because the enabling statutes failed to articulate a clear intention to cloak the entities with eleventh amendment immunity

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that the supreme court in mount healthy and lake country concluded that the entities were not arms of the state because the enabling statutes failed to articulate a clear intention to cloak the entities with eleventh amendment immunity
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: which he had received pursuant to the vacated Order of May 17, 1995, to allow the Chapter 7 trustee to distribute the professional fees pro rata. Mr. Desselle has not complied with this Court’s Order to turn over any funds received as interim compensation. He now moves this Court to reconsider the reduction in fees following the hearing on July 24,1995, arguing that the services were actual and necessary, and the Court’s reasons for the reduction are not in accordance with 11 U.S.C. § 330(a). The Court previously found that: (1) the description and itemization of services in the amended application were inadequate and unhelpful in assisting the Court in determining either the necessity of the services rendered or the reasonableness of the charges for those services; (W.D.Mich.1992) (<HOLDING>); In re Bank of New England Corp., 142 B.R. Options: A. holding that plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys fees for time spent litigating the fees issue on appeal under title viis attorneys fee provision B. holding district court erred when pursuant to a general contract for attorneys fees it awarded reimbursement for time spent justifying fee application in reasonableness hearing C. holding that oncors request for the trial judge rather than the jury to determine the reasonableness of its attorneys fees and the failure to submit the question of attorneys fees to the jury resulted in a waiver of oncors claim for the recovery of attorneys fees D. holding that applications for attorneys fees must state in detail time spent and the nature of each discrete task before the court can assess the reasonableness of the fees E. holding that awarded fees were reasonable and that proof that attorneys fees are necessary apart from testimony as to the reasonableness of the fee is not required

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that applications for attorneys fees must state in detail time spent and the nature of each discrete task before the court can assess the reasonableness of the fees
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This First Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Any signature delivered by a party by facsimile or electronic transmission (including email transmission of a PDF image) shall be deemed to be an original signature hereto.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you acknowledge that breaching travel provider terms could result in the cancellation of tickets or reservations , revocation of frequent flier miles and other benefits , and additional charges .

assistant: Unilateral termination
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 Department will withhold future Medicaid payments due and owing to Riverside, jeopardizing its financial well-being. Moreover, Riverside argues in its supplemental brief that “provider standing has been recognized in the Medicaid context as to beneficiary eligibility and coverage issues.” Thus Riverside maintains that there is no impediment, statutory or otherwise, precluding our review of its claims. Undoubtedly the recoupment notices, if and when they are carried out, will affect Riverside’s bottom line, and for that reason we agree that Riverside has shown that the coverage determinations and the resulting threat of recoupment constitute an injury sufficient for the purposes of Article III standing. See, e.g., Arthur v. District of Columbia, 857 A.2d 473, 488 n. 19 (D.C.2004) (<HOLDING>). However, this court, at least for now, is not Options: A. holding that the appellants claim that the circuit court erred in failing to make specific findings of fact as to all claims in the appellants rule 32 petition was not preserved for review because the appellant did not first present the claim to the circuit court B. recognizing that prisoners former attorney had a significant relationship with the prisoner for purposes of next friend standing because attorney had acted on behalf of the prisoner in prior legal proceedings C. holding that the district had standing to raise claims on behalf of the appellant because the district had a direct financial stake in supporting the position that appellants former wife is the owner of the underlying funds D. holding that the appellants claim that the circuit court failed to make specific findings of fact relating to issues raised at an evidentiary hearing on the appellants postconviction petition was not preserved for review because the appellant did not raise the issue in the circuit court E. holding that defendants had no standing where they conceded that they did not own the automobile searched and were simply passengers the owner of the car had been the driver of the vehicle at the time of the search

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the district had standing to raise claims on behalf of the appellant because the district had a direct financial stake in supporting the position that appellants former wife is the owner of the underlying funds
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 superficially persuasive, the fundamental differences in the statutory scheme and legislative histories of the two acts require us to find federal pre-emption in the case of train speed limits. b. Vegetation Easterwood also claims that excessive vegetation on the side of the track obstructed the views of the train engineers and the decedent, thereby causing the accident. We find this claim to be partially pre-empted. Under 49 C.F.R. § 213.37 (1990), track owners must keep vegetation on or immediately adjacent to the tracks under control. Because the Secretary has chosen to regulate vegetation, Congress explicitly has pre-empted all state regulation in this area. See 45 U.S.C.A. § 434 (1986); See also Missouri Pac. R.R. Co. v. Railroad Comm. of Tex., 833 F.2d 570 (5th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). However, while the Secretary has chosen to Options: A. holding that general maritime law preempts state law B. holding that 49 usc 44112 applies to owners of aircraft and preempts state law that would hold owners vicariously liable in aircraft accidents C. holding that the flsa preempts certain state law claims D. holding that fifra preempts state law failure to warn claims E. holding that 49 cfr 21337 preempts all state regulation of vegetation immediately adjacent to railbed

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that 49 cfr 21337 preempts all state regulation of vegetation immediately adjacent to railbed
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that this is consistent with the legislative intent “to increase the grading of the offense when a Chapter 31 sexual offense comprised the act which corrupted or tended to corrupt the morals of a minor.” Commonwealth’s Brief, at 10. Appellant’s claim demands that we interpret the corruption of minors statute before we determine whether he committed an offense under subsection (a)(l)(ii). Because statutory interpretation is a matter of law, our standard of review is de novo, and our scope of review is plenary. Commonwealth v. McClintic, 589 Pa. 465, 472, 909 A.2d 1241, 1245 (2006). Consequently, we are not bound by the lower court’s conclusions regarding the proper meaning of the applicable provisions of this statute. See Commonwealth v. Kyle, 582 Pa. 624, 632, 874 A.2d 12, 17 (2005) (<HOLDING>). Our review is further governed by the Options: A. holding that the grant of an injunction is reviewed for abuse of discretion but without deference to the legal conclusions of the trial court B. holding that our court owes no duty of deference to the legal conclusions of lower courts regarding an issue of statutory construction C. holding that where the issue before the court is legal as opposed to factual an appellate court need not give deference to a trial courts decision D. holding that on review of a motion to suppress the appellate court is to give deference to a trial courts factual findings but legal conclusions are reviewed de novo E. holding that a trial courts statutory interpretation is given no deference on review

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that our court owes no duty of deference to the legal conclusions of lower courts regarding an issue of statutory construction
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 Term, the Company shall pay to the Executive an annual base salary of $275,000 (the “Base Salary”), which Base Salary shall be payable at the times and in the manner consistent with the Company’s general policies regarding compensation of the Company’s senior executives. The Base Salary will be reviewed periodically by the Compensation Committee and may be increased (but not decreased, except for across-the-board reductions generally applicable to the Company’s senior executives) from time to time in the Compensation Committee’s sole discretion.

assistant: Base Salary
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: Promptly after receipt by an indemnified party hereunder of notice of the commencement of any action, such indemnified party shall, if a claim in respect thereof is to be made against the indemnifying party hereunder, notify the indemnifying party in writing thereof, but the omission to so notify the indemnifying party shall not relieve it from any liability that it may have to any indemnified party other than under this Section 2.05(c) except to the extent that the indemnifying party is materially prejudiced by such failure. In any action brought against any indemnified party, it shall notify the indemnifying party of the commencement thereof. The indemnifying party shall be entitled to participate in and, to the extent it shall wish, to assume and undertake the defense thereof with counsel reasonably satisfactory to such indemnified party and, after notice from the indemnifying party to such indemnified party of its election so to assume and undertake the defense thereof, the indemnifying party shall not be liable to such indemnified party under this Section 2.05 for any legal expenses subsequently incurred by such indemnified party in connection with the defense thereof other than reasonable costs of investigation and of liaison with counsel so selected; provided , however, that, (i) if the indemnifying party has failed to assume the defense or employ counsel reasonably satisfactory to the indemnified party or (ii) if the defendants in any such action include both the indemnified party and the indemnifying party and counsel to the indemnified party shall have concluded that there may be reasonable defenses available to the indemnified party that are different from or additional to those available to the indemnifying party, or if the interests of the indemnified party reasonably may be deemed to conflict with the interests of the indemnifying party, then the indemnified party shall have the right to select a separate counsel and to assume such legal defense and otherwise to participate in the defense of such action, with the reasonable expenses and fees of such separate counsel and other reasonable expenses related to such participation to be reimbursed by the indemnifying party as incurred. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, no indemnifying party shall settle any action brought against any indemnified party with respect to which such indemnified party may be entitled to indemnification hereunder without the prior written consent of the indemnified party, unless the settlement thereof imposes no liability or obligation on, includes a complete and unconditional release from liability of, and does not contain any admission of wrongdoing by, the indemnified party.

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: more modem statutes use the term "disability.” Modern practice now also gives preference to tire wording "per son with a disability,” rather than "disabled person” — but both phrases have the same meaning. 13 . In Ranger Fuel Corporation v. W.Va. Human Rights Comm'n., 180 W.Va. 260, 376 S.E.2d 154 (1988), we stated that West Virginia's pre-1989 "actual disabilities only” statutory definition of "person with a disability” was to be strictly construed for purposes of determining whether a person had protected status to bring a claim under the law. Applying this standard to facts arising under the pre-1989 law, this Court decided a number of cases addressing the issue of "who is a person with a disability?” See Benjamin R. v. Orkin Exterminating Co., 182 W.Va. 615, 390 S.E.2d 814 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Casteel v. Consolidation Coal Co., 181 W.Va. Options: A. holding that west virginia disability discrimination law is not mechanically tied to federal disability discrimination jurisprudence B. holding disability discrimination claim barred C. holding that cjlearly the purpose of our legal disability statute is to lift the burden of severe time restrictions or limitations from those under legal disability that is from those who do not have the ability and capacity to protect their rights existing under our laws D. holding disability determination is made at time of alleged discrimination not later when remedial measures are used to correct disability E. holding that our law prohibiting disability discrimination could be invoked by a person with asymptomatic hiv infection and recognizing that the 1989 definitional changes broadened the scope of protected status under our disability discrimination law id at n 5

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that our law prohibiting disability discrimination could be invoked by a person with asymptomatic hiv infection and recognizing that the 1989 definitional changes broadened the scope of protected status under our disability discrimination law id at n 5
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 Buyer and the Sellers shall reasonably cooperate with the Title Company (at no cost to Buyer) in connection with obtaining title insurance insuring title to each Property subject only to the relevant Permitted Exceptions. In furtherance and not in limitation of the foregoing, at or prior to the Closing, the Buyer and the Sellers shall deliver to the Title Company such affidavits, certificates and other instruments as are reasonably requested by the Title Company and customarily furnished in connection with the issuance of owner’s policies of title insurance, including (i) evidence sufficient to establish (x) the legal existence of the Buyer and the Sellers and (y) the authority of the respective signatories of the Sellers and the Buyer to bind the Sellers and the Buyer, as the case may be, (ii) a certificate of good standing, or a certificate of existence, as applicable, of each Seller, (iii) if applicable, a partnership affidavit pursuant to Section 689.045, of the Florida Statutes, and (iv) a title affidavit in the form of Exhibit Q with such other reasonable additions thereto as may be reasonably and customarily requested by the Title Company.

assistant: Cooperation
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 Restricted Stock Unit Award is an Award of hypothetical Common Stock units (“Restricted Stock Units” or “RSUs”)) having a value equal to the Fair Market Value of an identical number of shares of Common Stock that entitles the Participant to payment in cash or shares of Common Stock at the expiration of the Restricted Period. Each RSU Award granted under the Plan must be evidenced by an Award Agreement. Each RSU Award so granted will be subject to the conditions set forth in this Article 8, and to such other conditions not inconsistent with the Plan as may be reflected in the applicable Award Agreement.

assistant: General
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 execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements to be executed, delivered and performed by Parent and the Sellers and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby are within the organizational powers of Parent and the Sellers and have been duly authorized by the Board of Directors of Parent and, to the extent required by applicable Law, prior to the Closing will be duly authorized by the Boards of Directors and, to the extent required by applicable Law, shareholders of the Sellers. No other organizational act or proceeding on the part of Parent or its shareholders or the Sellers is necessary to authorize this Agreement or the Ancillary Agreements to be executed, delivered and performed by Parent and the Sellers or the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby. This Agreement constitutes, and when executed and delivered, the Ancillary Agreements to be executed, delivered and performed by Parent and the Sellers will constitute (assuming the due authorization, execution and delivery by the other parties hereto and thereto), valid and binding agreements of Parent and the Sellers, enforceable in accordance with their respective terms, except as such may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other Laws affecting creditors’ rights and remedies generally, and by general equitable principles (to the extent recognized by applicable Law).

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: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Employee agrees to keep confidential all facts, opinions, and information which relate in any way to Employee’s employment and/or cessation of employment with Employer, as well as the terms of this Release; provided however, Employee may discuss the terms of this Release with (a) his spouse, legal representative, and/or tax preparer, each of whom must also agree to maintain confidentiality and comply with this Paragraph 4 of the Release, and (b) a government agency in connection with a government investigation.

assistant: Confidentiality
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 acknowledges that, in view of the uniqueness of the securities referenced herein and the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, the other Parties would not have an adequate remedy at law for money damages in the event that this Agreement has not been performed in accordance with its terms, and therefore agrees that the other Parties shall be entitled to specific performance and injunctive or other equitable relief, without the necessity of proving the inadequacy of monetary damages as a remedy.

assistant: Specific Performance
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 term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and expire on the last day of the month which is [*] from the Full Conversion Date, subject however, to (i) renewal or (ii) earlier termination in each instance as provided herein (the “Initial Term”, together with any extension of the Initial Term, collectively, the “Term”). The Term shall automatically be renewed for additional periods of twelve (12) months unless one party provides the other party at least one-hundred eighty (180) days’ notice of its intention not to renew prior to the then-current expiration date. The parties will memorialize the Full Conversion Date in written correspondence.

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: testimony. Moreover, we find that the written order excluding the victim’s statements to Marvin Bynum states, “The proffered statements do not possess equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness as required by Rule 804(B)(4) [sic] of the Rules of Evidence.” The better practice would have been for the trial court to specify in the other orders that the evidence was admissible under Rule 804(b)(5). However, from the transcript and the nearly identical findings and conclusions in all the written orders in the record, it is clear that the hearsay testimony admitted by the court was admitted pursuant to Rule 804(b)(5). Therefore, omission of the rule number from the orders admitting the testimony was harmless. Cf. State v. Smith, 315 N.C. 76, 97, 337 S.E.2d 833, 847 (1985) (<HOLDING>). Defendant argues further that there was Options: A. holding that it is incumbent upon the trial court to enter into the record findings of fact and conclusions that the manner of payment is reasonable and one which defendant can afford B. holding that before admitting rule 80324 hearsay statements the trial court must enter in the record appropriate statements rationale or findings of fact and conclusions of law C. holding that a trial courts judgment must comply with the statutory requirement that the judgment contain written findings of fact and conclusions of law D. holding district court abused its discretion in admitting state court findings of fact E. holding court must conduct new trial absent parties consent where deceased judge had not issued findings of fact and conclusions of law before death

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that before admitting rule 80324 hearsay statements the trial court must enter in the record appropriate statements rationale or findings of fact and conclusions of 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: cannot show a causal connection between the plaintiffs protected activity and the allegedly retaliatory actions. Id. The defendant bases its argument on the time that elapsed between the plaintiffs protected activity and the plaintiffs performance review. Id. at 12. To establish causation based on the temporal proximity between the protected activity and an adverse employment action, the case law holds that the temporal proximity must be “very close.” Bree-den, 532 U.S. at 273, 121 S.Ct. 1508 (citing with approval cases holding that a three-month and a four-month period is insufficient to establish the necessary temporal proximity). The plaintiffs September 2000 request for a hearing constitutes a protected activity. Singletary v. Dist. of Columbia, 351 F.3d 519, 524-25 (D.C.Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). Because the plaintiff received his November Options: A. holding that an attorneys repeated lies and deceptions about the status of the prisoners case were extraordinary circumstances B. holding appeal from an order dismissing action without prejudice was properly before this court C. holding that an attorneys letter inquiring about the status of an appeal from a decision dismissing a discrimination charge constituted protected activity D. holding there is no statutory barrier to an appeal from an order dismissing only a portion of a count E. holding that an appeal from an order vacating an award while directing a rehearing is an appeal improvidently taken

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that an attorneys letter inquiring about the status of an appeal from a decision dismissing a discrimination charge constituted protected activity
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: filed a complaint. CONTACT: Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP William Lerach, 800/449-4900 wsl£mwbhl.com Douglas Declaration at Exhibit 3. There is no dispute that the plaintiff filed the notice within 20 days of filing the complaint or that the moving class members moved for appointment as lead plaintiffs and approval of their attorneys as lead plaintiffs’ counsel within 60 days of publication of the notice. The plaintiff published the notice on the same date it filed the Complaint and the moving parties filed their motion 60 days later on October 30, 2000. Nor is it disputed that the Business Wire is a widely circulated national business-oriented publication or wire service within the meaning of the Act. See In re Nice Systems, 188 F.R.D. at 216 and n. 8 (citations omitted) (<HOLDING>). Additionally, the Court considered the motion Options: A. holding such service satisfies due process B. holding that rule 9bs heightened pleading requirement applies to allegations of mail and wire fraud used as predicate acts for a rico claim C. holding that wire and mail fraud statutes are construed identically D. holding that the business wire satisfies the acts widely circulated businessoriented wire service requirement E. holding that in the context of mail and wire fraud a plaintiff must have justifiably relied to his detriment on the defendants material misrepresentations

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the business wire satisfies the acts widely circulated businessoriented wire service requirement
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 shall not, during the Restricted Period, disparage the Company (or any affiliate) in any way that materially and adversely affects the goodwill, reputation or business relationships of the Company or the affiliate with the public generally, or with any of its customers, vendors or employees. During the Restricted Period, the Company shall not (and shall use reasonable efforts to procure that its directors and officers, its affiliates and the respective directors and officers or such affiliates shall not) disparage the Executive in any way that materially and adversely affects her or her reputation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Section shall not prohibit either Party from rebutting claims or statements made by any other person.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event that any one or more of the provisions of this Award Agreement should be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions contained herein shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: for impeachment purposes and provides: Extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by a witness is not admissible unless the witness is afforded an opportunity to explain or deny the same and the opposite party is afforded an opportunity to interrogate the witness thereon, or the interests of justice otherwise require. This provision does not apply to statements of a party-opponent as defined in Rule 801(d)(2). “[W]hen a prior inconsistent statement is used to impeach a witness, it is not hearsay because the statement is not used to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” Martin v. State, 736 N.E.2d 1213, 1217 (Ind.2000). Eads’s statement to the emergency room doctor is arguably inconsistent with his testimony and could be used for impeachment purposes. See, e.g., id. at 1217 (<HOLDING>). Generally, prior inconsistent statements are Options: A. holding that counsel was ineffective for inter alia failing to impeach a witness with prior inconsistent statements B. holding that a witnesss prior inconsistent statement to an officer could be used to impeach her C. holding that government could not impeach witness with prior statement because he refused to answer any questions and thus gave no testimony in court with which the prior statement could be judged to be inconsistent D. holding witnesss prior inconsistent statement about whether he was an eyewitness was evidence favorable to the defendant establishing brady violations first requirement E. holding that conviction on appeal is not admissible to impeach witnesss credibility

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a witnesss prior inconsistent statement to an officer could be used to impeach her
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: Borrower has the requisite corporate power and authority, as applicable, to enter into and to consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the other Transaction Documents and otherwise to carry out its obligations hereunder and thereunder. The execution and delivery of this Agreement and the other Transaction Documents by Borrower and the consummation by it of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby have been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of Borrower, and no further action of Borrower, its board of directors or stockholders is required in connection herewith or therewith.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the location of relevant documents and relative ease of access to sources of proof; (3) the convenience of the parties; (4) the locus of the operative facts; (5) the availability of process to compel the attendance of unwilling witnesses; (6) the relative means of the parties; (7) the forum’s familiarity with the governing law; (8) the weight accorded the plaintiffs choice of forum; and (9) trial efficiency and the interests of justice, based on the totality of the circumstances. Overland, Inc. v. Taylor, 79 F.Supp.2d 809, 811 (E.D.Mich.2000); see also Grand Kensington, LLC v. Burger King Corp., 81 F.Supp.2d 834, 836 (E.D.Mich.2000); Helder v. Hitachi Power Tools, USA Ltd,., 764 F.Supp. 93, 96 (E.D.Mich.1991); accord Moses v. Bus. Card Express, Inc., 929 F.2d 1131, 1137 (6th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Stewart Organization, Inc., 487 U.S. Options: A. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ordering a separate trial for the counterclaims where the convenience of the parties would be served B. recognizing such balance of interests C. holding that a court should consider the private interests of the parties including their convenience and the convenience of potential witnesses as well as other publicinterest concerns such as systemic integrity and fairness which come under the rubric of interests of justice D. holding that directors of a whollyowned corporation could consider the interests of the parent company as well as the interests of their corporation because there was only one substantive interest to be protected E. holding that its flexible approach to due process taking account of private interests the potential for reducing erroneous deprivations and the costs of procedures needed to reduce errors applies to evaluations of notice as well as the procedures at a hearing

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a court should consider the private interests of the parties including their convenience and the convenience of potential witnesses as well as other publicinterest concerns such as systemic integrity and fairness which come under the rubric of interests of justice
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 consider evidence of Clemons’s IQ when sentencing him to death. Counsel stated that the Supreme Court of the United States' holdings in Tennard and Smith require the circuit court to investigate and find as mitigating any evidence indicating that a capital defendant has a low IQ. Clemons did not raise this claim in the circuit court. In his Rule 32 petition, he asserted only that the "jury did not hear and was therefore unable to consider and give effect to his mitigating evidence of low intelligence and mental retardation." (C. 20.) Because Clemons’s allegation that the circuit court was required to find and consider mitigating evidence relating to his IQ was not raised in his Rule 32 petition, that claim is not properly before this Court. See Ex parte Clemons, 55 So.3d at 351 (<HOLDING>); Ex parte Linnell, 484 So.2d 455, 457 Options: A. holding that appellate courts may not on appeal from the dismissal of a rule 32 petition consider claims not raised in the rule 32 petition B. holding that because the petitioner had already filed a rule 371 petition he was barred from submitting a subsequent petition under that rule and his petition was subject to dismissal on that basis regardless of the label he placed on it C. holding that where the petitioner alleges that he failed to receive notice of the dismissal of his rule 32 ala rcrim p petition in time to effect a timely appeal therefrom and the events about which the petitioner complains all occurred before june 1 2005 the effective date of the amendment to rule 32 providing a different remedy for obtaining an outoftime appeal from the dismissal of a rule 32 petition a petition for a writ of mandamus is the only appropriate remedy D. holding that a similar claim in a rule 32 petition was procedurally barred because it was raised at trial and because it was raised on direct appeal E. recognizing that rule 32 is a postconviction remedy

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that appellate courts may not on appeal from the dismissal of a rule 32 petition consider claims not raised in the rule 32 petition
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: factors. Id. Here, we find that the district court ignored a material factor deserving significant weight — indeed the central thesis of appellant’s argument. That is, the plaintiffs position as Advocate for Persons with Disabilities was abolished in 2013 when Law 75 explicitly repealed Reorganization Plan 1 of 2011 and Law 78 created the Office of Ombudsman for Persons with Disabilities. As such, we further find that the court erred in finding that Diaz had demonstrated a l 6) (same) (citing Abt v. United States, 146 Ct.Cl. 205, 210 (1959)), aff'd, 818 F.2d 876 (Fed.Cir.1987). Repeal is an act unquestionably within the ken of the Puerto Rico Legislature and thus is fatal to Diaz’s legal position. See Higginbotham v. Baton Rouge, 306 U.S. 535, 538, 59 S.Ct. 705, 83 L.Ed. 968 (1939) (<HOLDING>); see also Bastían v. Kennedy, 829 F.2d 1, 2 Options: A. recognizing that the legislature can create statutory exceptions to atwill employment B. holding that the legislature may create or expand privileges by statute C. holding that state legislature may at pleasure create or abolish public offices D. holding that the colorado constitution reserves no authority in the state legislature to change add to or diminish the qualifications for constitutionally created offices E. recognizing that the state courts have the power to abolish the tort of alienation of affections

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that state legislature may at pleasure create or abolish public offices
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 Mubarak-Assad averred that DENSO Japan “is a Japanese corporation.” Dweib also averred that DENSO Japan manufactured ECUs in “many of the subject vehicles” as follows: In another [Field Technical Report] from one of the technicians in Hong Kong, dated September 28, 2007, a similar [unintended acceleration] event was reported with a targeted investigation of the [ECU]. There were no DTCs [DTC is not defined] recorded and the root cause was unknown. The resulting report by [DENSO Japan], the manufacturer of the accelerator pedals in many of [the ECUs], confirmed that they could not find any abnormalities on any accelerator components. In the corresponding reply from [Toyota Motor Corporation], dated Apr Holding, LLC, 824 S.W.3d 840, 847 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Hall pleaded allegations Options: A. holding plaintiffs allegation that defendants committed torts in texas was sufficient to bring defendants under the longarm statute B. recognizing strong interest in protecting texas citizens where tort was committed in whole or in part in texas C. holding plaintiff was required to allege defendants committed fraudulent acts in texas to satisfy his initial burden of pleading jurisdictional facts D. holding plaintiffs allegation that defendants committed torts in houston texas was sufficient to bring defendants under the longarm statute for plaintiffs claims of various forms of fraud and negligent misrepresentation E. holding misrepresentation made by outofstate defendant to texas plaintiff who relied on it in texas satisfied requirement for jurisdiction under longarm statute based on commission of a tort in part in texas

assistant: The best answer is A. holding plaintiffs allegation that defendants committed torts in texas was sufficient to bring defendants under the longarm statute
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: Upon the occurrence of any Event of Default, all sums due and payable to the Holder under this Note shall, at the option of the Holder, become due and payable immediately without presentment, demand, notice of nonpayment, protest, notice of protest, or other notice of dishonor, all of which are hereby expressly waived by the Maker. Any payment under this Note (i) not paid within 10 days following the Calendar Due Date or (ii) due immediately following acceleration by the Holder shall bear interest at the rate of 15% from such Calendar Due Date or acceleration, as applicable, until paid, subject to Section 7.5. To the extent permitted by law, the Maker waives any right to and stay of execution and the benefit of all exemption laws now or hereafter in effect. In addition to the foregoing, upon the occurrence of any Event of Default, the Holder may forthwith exercise singly, concurrently, successively, or otherwise any and all rights and remedies available to the Holder at law, in equity, or otherwise.

assistant: Remedies