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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Keep its insurable property adequately insured at all times by financially sound and reputable insurers; maintain such other insurance with financially sound and reputable insurers, to such extent and against such risks as is customary with companies in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations, including insurance with respect to Mortgaged Properties and the Vessels, Chartered Vessels and other properties material to the business of the Restricted Parties against such casualties and contingencies and of such types and in such amounts with such deductibles as is customary in the case of similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations, or as otherwise required by any Legal Requirements; provided , however , in addition to the requirements set forth above in this sentence, the Restricted Parties will at all times cause at least the Required Insurance to be maintained with respect to the Collateral Vessels.

assistant: Insurances
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 by Credit Parties of the Credit Documents to which they are parties and the consummation of the transactions contemplated by the Credit Documents do not and will not (a) violate any provision of any Applicable Laws relating to any Credit Party, any of the Organizational Documents of any Credit Party, or any order, judgment or decree of any court or other agency of government binding on any Credit Party; (b) except as could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, conflict with, result in a breach of or constitute (with due notice or lapse of time or both) a default under any other Contractual Obligations of any Credit Party; (c) result in or require the creation or imposition of any Lien upon any of the properties or assets of any Credit Party (other than any Liens created under any of the Credit Documents in favor of the Collateral Agent for the benefit of the holders of the Obligations) whether now owned or hereafter acquired; or (d) require any approval of stockholders, members or partners or any approval or consent of any Person under any Contractual Obligation of any Credit Party.

assistant: No Conflicts
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 duty being to exercise reasonable care for the invitee's protection while she is on the premises. Id. Landowners owe a licensee the duty to refrain from willfully or wantonly injuring her or acting in a manner to increase her peril. Id. This includes the duty to warn a licensee of any latent danger on the premises of which the landowner has knowledge. Id. Finally, the duty owed to a trespasser is the duty merely to refrain from wantonly or willfully injuring her after discovering her presence. Id. However, even when dealing with an invitee, the landowner's duty of care is not limitless. The most common example of the limitation is when an invitee exceeds the scope of invitation, she loses her status. See Markle v. Hacienda Mexican Rest., 570 N.E.2d 969, 974 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (<HOLDING>). Further, a landowner is not liable if the Options: A. holding that a plaintiff can show that she is qualified by presenting credible evidence that she continued to possess the objective qualifications she held when she was hired B. holding that even though the declarant was not in danger she was experiencing an ongoing emergency because she did not know where her children were and she feared for their safety C. holding that the district court did not err in failing to address the defendant personally to determine whether she understood the rights she was waiving by admitting that she violated the conditions of her probation D. holding that even though a visitor may be an invitee when she first enters the premises her status may change to licensee while she is there if the use to which she puts the property is not within the scope of the invitation E. holding appellant produced no evidence that when she made her complaints to management she ever mentioned that she felt she was being treated unfairly due to her race or sex

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that even though a visitor may be an invitee when she first enters the premises her status may change to licensee while she is there if the use to which she puts the property is not within the scope of the invitation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding concerning the subject matters hereof among the Parties hereto and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements, communications, proposals and representations with respect to its subject matters and prevails over any conflicting or additional terms of any quote, order, acknowledgement or any similar prior understanding among the Parties. No modification or amendment to this Agreement will be binding, unless in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each Party.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: hearings; defense counsel was not. The appellants base their argument on the text of CIPA and Rule 16, both of which refer to “a written statement to be inspected by the court [/judge] alone.” CIPA § 4, 18 U.S.C. app. 3 § 4; Fed R.Crim. P. 16(d)(1) (emphasis added). No mention is made in CIPA or Rule 16 about a hearing in which counsel participate. Ex parte hearings are generally disfavored. See, e.g., United States v. Kenney, 911 F.2d 315, 321 (9th Cir.1990). In a case involving classified documents, however, ex parte, in camera hearings in which government counsel participates to the exclusion of defense counsel are part of the process that the district court may use in order to decide the relevancy of the information. See United States v. Yunis, 867 F.2d 617, 620 (D.C.Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). Such a hearing is appropriate if the court Options: A. recognizing that information disclosed in private is not a public disclosure under the fca B. holding party seeking disqualification waives attorneyclient privilege as to the court so the court may assess the contents of allegedly confidential information and the party may present the information either in a hearing out of the presence of the party against whom confidentiality is to be protected or in camera inspection C. holding that the only statements not disclosed were the probation officers recommendations which did not constitute factual information as contemplated by the statute D. holding in camera review by trial court to determine whether crime stoppers information contained brady information would meet the balance of defendants constitutional rights against the states interest in fostering law enforcement E. holding an ex parte in camera hearing in which the government explained the specific damage to national defense if information were disclosed

assistant: The best answer is E. holding an ex parte in camera hearing in which the government explained the specific damage to national defense if information were disclosed
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 extent required by applicable law, all payments under this Agreement shall be subject to applicable taxes or social security or national insurance deductions (or similar taxes, deductions or contributions under applicable law). The Company or any of its Affiliates shall have the right to withhold (or require Participant to remit to the Company an amount sufficient to satisfy) all applicable taxes and social security premiums and to make any applicable set-offs they determine to be necessary or desirable in accordance with applicable law in respect of any payments made under this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 95, 101, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 75 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983). To satisfy this requirement, the party must show, among other things, that he “has sustained or is immediately in danger of sustaining some direct injury” and that “the injury or threat of injury [is] both real and immediate, not conjectural or hypothetical.” Id. at 101-02, 103 S.Ct. 1660 (quotations omitted). Here, although Yanke’s home has not yet been searched, he has been assessed a surcharge of $100 per month since July 2003 because he has failed to comply with the Ordinance’s inspection requirement. The Court finds, therefore, that Yanke’s injury is concrete and immediate. Accordingly, Yanke has standing to bring a claim under the Fourth Amendment. Cf. Columbia Basin Apartment Ass’n v. City of Pasco, 268 F.3d 791, 797 (9th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). The Court now turns to the City’s argument Options: A. holding tenants leasing house by oral agreement were coinsureds both landlord and tenants had liability insurance B. holding that tenants had standing to bring fourth amendment claim where tenants were threatened with eviction unless they consented to allegedly unreasonable warrantless searches C. holding landlord and tenants obligations mutually dependent D. holding that police officers warrantless search of rented home with consent of landlord but not tenant violated tenants fourth amendment rights E. holding tenants vacating premises allegedly in breach of a lease was not enough to trigger c 93a liability

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that tenants had standing to bring fourth amendment claim where tenants were threatened with eviction unless they consented to allegedly unreasonable warrantless searches
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 Security Agreement shall continue in effect (notwithstanding the fact that from time to time there may be no Secured Obligations outstanding) until (i) the Credit Agreement has terminated pursuant to its express terms and (ii) all of the Secured Obligations have been indefeasibly paid and performed in full (or with respect to any outstanding Letters of Credit, a cash deposit or at the discretion of the Administrative Agent, a backup standby Letter of Credit satisfactory to the Administrative Agent and the Issuing Bank has been delivered to the Administrative Agent as required by the Credit Agreement) and no commitments of the Administrative Agent or the other Secured Parties which would give rise to any Secured Obligations are outstanding.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Stockholder shall, from time to time, execute and deliver, or cause to be executed and delivered, such additional or further consents, documents and other instruments as the Company may reasonably request for the purpose of effectuating the matters covered by this Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All of the terms and conditions set forth in the LMMA, dated September 6, 2017, by and between G&L and Alliance, remain the same as if GA DU is stepping into G&L's shoes, and the LMMA may not thereafter be modified without written consent of both Alliance and GA DU.

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: considering whether a “specific element” is present in the statute underlying the prior conviction); United States v. Weis, 487 F.3d 1148, 1151 (8th Cir.2007) (explaining that contrary to the § 2252(b)(1) enhancement, other sentencing enhancement provisions, such as 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B), require a prior offense to include a specific element in order to qualify as a predicate offense, which limits the court to reviewing the record of conviction only to determine the elements of the convicted offense). Rather, in applying the § 2252(b)(1) enhancement, we consider whether the conduct criminalized by the statute “relat[es] to” sexual abuse of a minor even though it may not specifically include acts of sexual abuse or require the victim to be a minor. See Weis, 487 F.3d at 1151-52 (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation marks and citations Options: A. recognizing the two distinct generic definitions of sexual abuse of a minor and holding that a statute contains the element of abuse under the medinavilla definition if it applies to sexual conduct with children younger than fourteen years B. holding that attempted sexual abuse is a specific intent crime C. holding that the new york misdemeanor offense of sexual abuse of a minor constitutes an aggravated felony under ina 101a43asexual abuse of a minor D. holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse E. holding that although there were six occurrences under the general liability policy there was only one sexual abuse occurrence where sexual abuse occurrence was defined as a single act or multiple continuous sporadic or related acts of sexual molestation or abuse caused by one perpetrator

assistant: The best answer is D. holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse
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: purpose of receiving claims from an employee covered by a group insurance policy. Our research has not disclosed any Montana case that resolves this question. Perhaps the closest case is Nautilus Ins. Co. v. First Nat’l Ins. Inc., 254 Mont. 296, 837 P.2d 409 (1992), in which your Court stated that an “insurance broker is usually regarded as the agent of the insured” and that “the determination of which party a broker is acting for as to a particular matter depends on which party requested him to do the particular thing.” Id. at 411-12. There is case law from some jurisdictions which supports the position that an employer acts as an agent for an insurance company that has issued a group policy covering employees. See Norby v. Bankers Life Co., 304 Minn. 464, 231 N.W.2d 665, 669 (1975) (<HOLDING>); Bass v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 10 Options: A. holding an employee is an agent of his employer where the employer assumes the right to control time manner and method of work B. holding that the employer may be considered the insurers agent where the employer with the consent of the insurer performs routine administrative functions such as assisting in the processing of claims C. holding that the employer was not the insurers agent D. holding that glc 152 15 provides that the only party immune from suit under the statute is the direct employer a special employer is not immune because the special employer is not liable for the payment of workers compensation and there was no agreement between the direct employer and the special employer that the special employer would be liable for the payment of such compensation E. holding that an employer who performs administrative functions under a group insurance policy as in the instant case is deemed to be the agent of the insurer citing elfstrom

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the employer may be considered the insurers agent where the employer with the consent of the insurer performs routine administrative functions such as assisting in the processing of claims
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as set forth in Schedule 7.1(c) , none of the execution or delivery of this Agreement by the Company, the consummation of the transactions contemplated herein, or the performance of or compliance with the terms and provisions hereof by the Company will: (i) violate or conflict with any provision of the Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws of the Company or the applicable organizational documents of any of its Subsidiaries; (ii) violate any law, regulation (including Regulation G, T, U or X), order, writ, judgment, injunction, decree or permit applicable to the Company or any of its Subsidiaries; (iii) trigger, implicate or give rise to any right or obligation under any MFN Agreement; (iv) violate or conflict with any terms or provisions of, or cause an event of default or trigger, implicate or give rise to any right or obligation under, any agreement, instrument or contract to which the Company or any of its Subsidiaries is a party; or (v) result in or require the creation of any lien, security interest or other charge or encumbrance upon or with respect to its or its Subsidiaries’ properties or assets; except, in the case of clauses (ii), (iv) or (v), any such conflicts, violations, breaches, defaults or other occurrences that, individually or in the aggregate, would neither (A) be reasonably likely to materially and adversely affect the Company and its Subsidiaries nor (B) prevent, materially delay or materially impede the ability of the Company to consummate the transactions contemplated herein, or perform or comply with the terms and provisions hereof).

assistant: No Conflicts
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 discharge itself may become stigmatizing in the public eye.” Kramer v. S. Oregon Unix., No. 1:13-cv-00340-PA, 2014 WL 6810767, at *7 (D.Or. Dec. 1, 2014) (quoting Campanelli v. Bockrath, 100 F.3d 1476, 1482 (9th Cir.1996)). The statement and the discharge must share “some temporal nexus” to be considered “closely related.” Id. (citing Campanelli, 100 F.3d at 1483; Tibbetts v. Kulongoski, 567 F.3d 529, 537 (9th Cir.2009)). The performance evaluation occurred in May of 2009, more than two years before Hoy resigned from the YCSO in June of 2011. Although there is no bright-line rule for analyzing the temporal nexus, two events approximately twenty-five months apart are not sufficiently connected in time to create a nexus under Campanelli and its progeny. See Tibbetts, 567 F.3d at 538 (<HOLDING>). Moreover, Hoy’s resignation was based on the Options: A. holding that no federal nexus is required B. holding positive press release was not actionable where plaintiffs have not alleged that any of the historical representations in that press release were false C. holding that a nexus between the corporate officers or directors official activity and the matter for which indemnification is sought must be shown though no more than a nexus whether a nexus exists is a question of fact to be determined by the trial court considering all the circumstances surrounding the proposed indemnification D. holding that press release issued by acting director of office of rent stabilization regarding employee termination was within scope of directors official duties and absolutely privileged E. holding that a sixteenmonth span between termination and a press release which publicized the stigmatizing statement at issue severed the temporal nexus

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a sixteenmonth span between termination and a press release which publicized the stigmatizing statement at issue severed the temporal nexus
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 section headings in this Agreement are for convenience only. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which is an original. It shall not be necessary in making proof of this Agreement or any counterpart hereof to produce or account for any of the other counterparts.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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: John Henry Ryskamp appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s order dismissing his action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo, Gorospe v. Comm’r, 451 F.3d 966, 968 (9th Cir.2006), and we affirm. The Tax Court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction because Ryskamp was never issued a notice of deficiency or a notice of determination. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 6213(a), 6330(d); see also Gorospe, 451 F.3d at 968 (the Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, and its subject matter jurisdiction is defined by Title 26 of the United States Code); Abrams v. Comm’r, 814 F.2d 1356, 1356-57 (9th Cir.1987) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). We deny Ryskamp’s motions filed on June Options: A. holding that a prefiling notification letter from the internal revenue service was not a notice of deficiency and therefore the tax court had no jurisdiction over the taxpayers petition B. holding that overvaluation penalty did not apply where the taxpayers conceded other grounds of adjustment in the notice of deficiency including that they lacked a profit objective that the property at issue was not qualifying property and that the property was not placed in service C. holding that following confirmation of the debtors chapter 11 plan the internal revenue service could collect a nondischargeable tax claim that was not listed in the irss bankruptcy claim D. holding that a second deficiency notice issued for a taxable year was valid where it determined a deficiency in a different type of tax than did the earlier deficiency notice E. holding that the debtor lacked standing to bring a claim against the internal revenue service for the improper assessment of a tax deficiency because the cause of action was the property of the estate and had not been abandoned to the debtor

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a prefiling notification letter from the internal revenue service was not a notice of deficiency and therefore the tax court had no jurisdiction over the taxpayers 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Award of RSUs is documented by the records of the Committee or its delegate which shall be the final determinant of the number of Shares granted and the conditions of this Agreement. The Committee may amend or modify this Award in any manner to the extent that the Committee would have had the authority under the Plan initially to grant such Award, provided that no such amendment or modification shall materially diminish the Participant’s rights under this Agreement without his consent. Except as in accordance with the two immediately preceding sentences and Section 16(b), this Agreement may be amended, modified or supplemented only by an instrument in writing signed by both parties hereto.

assistant: Amendments
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: Unless specifically indicated otherwise, this Plan supersedes any and all prior communications understandings, arrangements or agreements between the parties, including the Employer, the Company, the Board, the Committee and any and all Participants, whether written, oral, express or implied relating thereto.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the stars used for non-hotel accommodations ( e.g. bed & breakfasts ) do not correspond to the star ranking system as may be applicable to hotel accommodations .

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: to the requested costs of copying patent-related documents and grant the $457 requested. 3. Deposition Expenses E + H requests $2,128.91 for expenses incurred in transcribing deposition testimony and obtaining copies of deposition transcripts of Robert E. Kiser, Clarence Mason and Gordon Beazley. Hawk objects, arguing that neither the Kiser nor the Beazley deposition transcripts were introduced into evidence at trial, and for that reason they cannot be taxed as costs. The cases cited by Hawk in support of this objection do hold that costs for depositions not introduced at trial are “generally not recompensable under Rule 54(d) and 28 U.S.C. § 1920,” Wolfe v. Wolfe, 570 F.Supp. 826, 829 (D.S.C.1983); see also, Sperry Rand Corporation v. A-T-O, Inc., 58 F.R.D. 132, 138 (Va.1973) (<HOLDING>). However, Hawk fails to mention that “[t]he Options: A. holding that a cause of action for an unconstitutional taking accrues at the time the taking occurs B. holding that the expenses of depositions taken merely for discovery purposes should be borne by the party taking them C. holding that an award for medical expenses is proper when the expenses have been incurred but not paid D. holding that debtors have the burden of proving that other necessary expenses on form b22c are actual reasonable and necessary expenses and that these expenses should be considered in light of schedule j and other relevant evidence E. holding sanctions were appropriate where party filed motions merely for purposes of delay

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the expenses of depositions taken merely for discovery purposes should be borne by the party taking them
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: July 6, 2011) (characterizing database keyword searching as the nontaxable “ESI equivalent of having a room full of reviewers physically review paper documents”); Race Tires, 674 F.3d at 170 (approving of cases “recognizing] that gathering, preserving, processing, searching, culling and extracting ESI simply do not amount to ‘making copies’ ”). To be sure, it may be more or even most convenient for a producing party to create a database of ESI. But activities undertaken only “for the convenience of counsel are not taxable.” Gupta v. Walt Disney World Co., No. 6:05-cv-1432-Orl-22UAM, 2007 WL 2002454, at *3 (M.D.Fla. July 5, 2007) (citing Helms v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 808 F.Supp. 1568, 1570 (N.D.Ga.1992), aff'd, 998 F.2d 1023 (11th Cir.1993) (table)); see CBT Flint, 737 F.3d at 1330 (<HOLDING>). Defendants are not entitled to an award of Options: A. holding that producing party need only make requested documents available for inspection and need not pay for copying costs B. holding that copying costs are taxable if they are necessary to make copies of information required to be produced and not incurred just to make copies for the convenience of the producing party C. holding that where the defendants 107 claim was based on remediation costs they incurred and may incur in the future as the result of a lawsuit instituted under 107a they did not demonstrate that they incurred necessary costs of response within the meaning of 107a D. holding that courier and messenger costs are not taxable costs E. holding that travel and visa costs are incurred by guestworkers for the primary benefit and convenience of their employer and thus are not other facilities that can be counted as wage credits pursuant to 29 usc 203m

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that copying costs are taxable if they are necessary to make copies of information required to be produced and not incurred just to make copies for the convenience of the producing party
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: Review to comment upon it, is clear evidence that the substituted action was recognized for what it was, a nullity. Because the alleged error should have been readily apparent at the time the Board of Review considered this case, it does not now merit coram nobis relief. Even assuming arguendo that the petitioner had demonstrated a fundamental error not readily apparent at the time, three other reasons exist not to grant him relief. First, the writ of coram nobis is not available “where other authorized means of appeal or administrative review exist.” Ross, 43 M.J. at 771. In this case, petitioner could have applied for a correction of his record with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR). 10 U.S.C. § 1552 (1994); see also Baxter v. Claytor, 652 F.2d 181, 185 (D.C.Cir.l981)(<HOLDING>); Ballenger v. Marsh, 708 F.2d 349, 350 (8th Options: A. holding that the power to produce a change in a given legal relation may exist irrespective of the consent or knowledge either of the one subject to it or of the one holding it B. recognizing that in the united states it has been held that a court has the inherent power to change venue without reliance on constitutional or statutory authority when necessary to assure a fair trial C. holding that a change of venue has no affect on the applicable state law and that change of venue is but a change of courtrooms D. holding that where the appellant has failed to demonstrate error the court is not required to search the record for an error E. holding that bcnr has the power to remove all traces of an invalid court martial from a servicemans record and to change a dishonorable discharge into an honorable one

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that bcnr has the power to remove all traces of an invalid court martial from a servicemans record and to change a dishonorable discharge into an honorable one
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as otherwise set forth in Section 12(b) , in the event the Executive prevails on any material issue in connection with any controversy, dispute or claim which arises out of or relates to this Agreement, any other agreement or arrangement between the Executive and the Company, the Executive’s employment with the Company, or the termination thereof, then the Company shall reimburse the Executive (and his beneficiaries) for any and all costs and expenses (including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other charges of counsel) incurred by the Executive (or any of his beneficiaries) in connection with such controversy, dispute or claim.

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: At all times during the term of this Agreement, each Distributor shall procure and maintain at its own expense commercial general liability insurance coverage and, if necessary, commercial umbrella insurance coverage, each written on an occurrence form, with policy limits of not less than $[***] per occurrence. You will be included as an additional insured under the policies, using ISO additional insured endorsements or substitute providing substantially equivalent coverage. All certificates shall provide for 30 days' written notice to you prior to the cancellation or material change of any policy.

assistant: Insurances
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: Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the Borrower may request the issuance of dollar denominated Letters of Credit for its own account or for the account of any other Loan Party, in a form reasonably acceptable to the Administrative Agent and the applicable Issuing Bank, at any time and from time to time during the period from the Closing Date until the day which is five (5) Business Days prior to the end of the Availability Period; provided that, in addition to the conditions set forth in Section 6.02 , the Borrower may not request the issuance, amendment, renewal or extension of Letters of Credit hereunder if (x) the LC Exposure would exceed the LC Commitment, (y) the Revolving Credit Exposure of any Lender would exceed the Commitment of such Lender or (z) a Borrowing Base Deficiency exists at such time or would result therefrom (collectively, the “LC Availability Requirements”). In the event of any inconsistency between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the terms and conditions of any Letter of Credit Agreement submitted by the Borrower to, or entered into by the Borrower with, the applicable Issuing Bank relating to any Letter of Credit, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control. The Issuing Bank shall not at any time be obligated to issue any Letter of Credit if such issuance would conflict with, or cause the Issuing Bank or any of the Lenders to exceed any limits imposed by, any applicable Governmental Requirement.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be instructed that “surreptitious” interception meant “unauthorized, in other words unlawful” interception. Under this theory, lawful intercepts by law enforcement would not qualify as surreptitious. Kachi-kian’s defense was that if he manufactured the wiretapping devices believing that they would be used primarily for law enforcement-authorized purposes, he would not be breaking the law because he could not have “[had] reason to know that the design of such device renders it primarily useful for ... surreptitious interception” of wire communications. Id. The term “surreptitious” as used in the statute was aimed at the secret nature of the interception, not the illegality of it. That is the common understanding of the word. See United States v. Lande, 968 F.2d 907, 910 (9th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Bast, 495 F.2d 138, 143 Options: A. holding that the cost of capital equipment is not recoverable under the terms of the miller act B. holding that experienced contractor familiar with business practices is merchant with respect to buying certain equipment despite lack of special knowledge of that equipment C. holding description all personal property sufficient to cover equipment D. holding that equipment manufactured to intercept and descramble satellite television programming met the surreptitious element because the producers of satellite programming were unable to detect the interception equipment E. holding that a general contractors right to forbid the work from being performed in a dangerous manner and the fact that he would have stopped the work and required protective equipment had he seen the employee of the independent contractor not using such equipment merely showed the possibility of control not actual control

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that equipment manufactured to intercept and descramble satellite television programming met the surreptitious element because the producers of satellite programming were unable to detect the interception equipment
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 determining whether one offense is a lesser included offense of another crime: [T]he definitions accorded the crimes determine whether one crime is a lesser included offense of another crime. In other words, all of the essential elements of the lesser crime must also be essential elements included in the greater crime. If the lesser crime has an essential element which is not completely covered by the greater crime, it is not a lesser included offense. State v. Weaver, 306 N.C. 629, 635, 295 S.E.2d 375, 378-79 (1982) (citation omitted) (emphasis omitted), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Collins, 334 N.C. 54, 61, 431 S.E.2d 188, 193 (1993); accord State v. Hedgepeth, 165 N.C. App. 321, 324, 598 S.E.2d 202, 205, disc. rev. denied, 359 N.C. 193, 607 S.E.2d 656 (2004) (<HOLDING>). Defendant was indicted for first degree rape. Options: A. holding that a lesser crime cannot be a lesser included offense of a greater crime if the lesser crime contains an essential element not included in the greater crime B. holding it is fundamental error to convict a defendant of crime not charged and which is not a lesser included offense of the charged crime C. holding that the crime of rape is a lesser included offense of the crime of felony murder in the perpetration of rape and that since the latter crime included all of the elements of the former consecutive sentences were therefore improper D. holding that reviewing court in a proper case may modify a judgment of conviction below and affirm it as a conviction of a lesser degree of the offense charged or of a lesser crime included therein where the errors do not affect the conviction of the lesser offense E. holding that an offense is factually lesser included if the charging instrument alleges that the means used to commit the crime charged include all of the elements of the alleged lesser included offense

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a lesser crime cannot be a lesser included offense of a greater crime if the lesser crime contains an essential element not included in the greater crime
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 not an agreement because it is unsigned. The Texas General Arbitration Act requires only that the terms of the agreement be written; it does not require that it be signed by either party. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 171.001 (Vernon Pamph. 1997). Burlington set forth the terms of its policy in its written supplement to its employee handbook. Akpan accepted the agreement and provided consideration by continuing to work for Burlington. Although an employee handbook is not a contract that will alter the at-will nature of the employment relationship, a provision in an employee manual may create enforceable rights where the provision does not alter the at-will nature of the employment relationship. Compare Federal Express Corp. v. Dutschmann, 846 S.W.2d 282, 283-84 (Tex.1993) (<HOLDING>) with E-Z Mart Stores, Inc. v. Hale, 883 S.W.2d Options: A. holding enforceable employee manual that was distributed to all employees B. holding an employee manual did not create contract restricting the employmentatwill relationship C. holding that whether a personnel policy manual modifies an employment contract is a question of fact D. holding that there was no employment contract where personnel manual provided that after three months an employee became a permanent employee where there was no additional expression as to duration E. holding employee manual binding based in part on its widespread distribution

assistant: The best answer is B. holding an employee manual did not create contract restricting the employmentatwill relationship
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: 1207 (10th Cir.2011). The Tenth Circuit has held on several occasions that physical proximity between a weapon and narcotics can be sufficient to satisfy § 2K2.1(b)(6). See, e.g., United States v. Bunner, 134 F.3d 1000, 1006 (10th Cir.1998); United States v. Gomez-Arrellano, 5 F.3d 464, 467 (10th Cir.1993). In United States v. Bunner, the Tenth Circuit explained how physical proximity could establish a nexus between a handgun and a drug-trafficking offense: “Handguns are widely recognized as a tool of the drug dealers[’] trade. Accordingly, a weapon’s proximity to narcotics may be sufficient to provide the nexus necessary to enhance a defendant’s sentence under § 2K2. f narcotics be recovered for § 2K2.1(b)(6) to apply. See United States v. Condren, 18 F.3d 1190, 1199 (5th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Cunningham, No. CR 06-2493 Options: A. holding that the 4level enhancement may be based on any felony including as here felony possession of a small amount of drugs B. holding enhancement on a general verdict for felony murder impermissible on account of possession of a firearm because possession of a firearm was an essential element of one but not all of the predicate felonies the state relied on to prove felony murder C. holding that a prior nonarizona conviction to be used as a prior felony conviction under the statute must both be for an offense that would constitute a felony in arizona and be classified as a felony in the other jurisdiction D. holding that reversal of conviction for felony murder was required where jury failed to find the defendant guilty of the underlying felony as essential element of the felony murder offense E. holding that defendants prior felony convictions in georgia state court for drugrelated conspiracy and simple possession qualified as predicate prior felony drug offenses for 841b1a because under the plain language of the statute felony drug offense includes any criminal conduct relating to narcotics including simple possession which a state has proscribed as a felony

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the 4level enhancement may be based on any felony including as here felony possession of a small amount of drugs
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: Purchaser and Seller agree to keep confidential all information as the parties may from time to time develop, discover or impart to each other. Both Seller and Purchaser further agree that each will not at any time display, disclose or communicate such information to any person or entity other than one another, or use or apply same, without the other party’s prior written consent; provided, however, either of the parties may share the transaction details with their respective professional service personnel, including boundary surveyors, environmental surveyors and consultants, legal counsel, lenders, appraisers, accountants, architects, and engineers; provided, further, however, that in each such event the party revealing such information shall obtain and shall retain a written commitment from the recipient to maintain the confidentiality of the information and any party revealing such information shall maintain a written list of the name of each person to whom the information was revealed. Such list and commitment shall be available on request to any party to this Contract.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Id. All of the identified key witnesses in this case are in Washington, Japan, Ohio, and New York. No witnesses live in Texas. Even without including the four Japanese witnesses who would each have to travel an additional 1,756 miles or 7 hours by plane to Texas as compared with Washington State, the average travel required for each of the remaining six identified witnesses to Texas is approximately 700 miles more than to Washington. Furthermore, four of the identified witnesses live in Washington, and no witnesses live in Texas. The district court erroneously determined that the cost of attendance for willing witnesses only “slightly favors transfer.” On this record, this court does not agree with the district court’s assessment of the 100-mile tenet. See TS Tech, 551 F.3d at 1320 (<HOLDING>). The cost of attendance for willing witnesses Options: A. holding that a trial courts refusal to allow the defendant to attend the jury view was not prejudicial B. recognizing the same rule in texas courts C. recognizing this texas rule D. holding that it is function of trial court to judge witnesses credibility and to weigh conflicting evidence E. holding that the district courts refusal to considerably weigh this factor in favor of transfer was erroneous when the witnesses would need to travel approximately 900 more miles to attend trial in texas than in ohio

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the district courts refusal to considerably weigh this factor in favor of transfer was erroneous when the witnesses would need to travel approximately 900 more miles to attend trial in texas than in ohio
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 Loan Documents as modified herein are binding upon, and inure to the benefit of Borrower, each Guarantor, Administrative Agent and Lenders and their respective successors and assigns to the extent any such assignment is permitted under the Credit Agreement. This Amendment, and the interpretation and enforcement thereof shall be in accordance with the general terms and conditions set forth in the Original Credit Agreement (as modified herein), including the notice provisions, consent to jurisdiction provisions, governing law provisions, waiver of jury and judicial reference provisions, and the integration, counterpart and severability provisions, with Administrative Agent, Lender and Borrower being entitled to the benefits thereof and being bound thereby.

assistant: Binding Effects