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: vs. home party sales) and that the “similar to or competitive with” language can be read to refer to the method of direct sales as opposed, or in addition, to the products being sold. In this regard, as the undisputed facts demonstrate, PartyLite and Park Lane are competitors in that they compete for salespeople by offering competitive income opportunities under similar, albeit not identical, compensation schemes. Additionally, PartyLite and Park Lane are similar in that they both use the home party method of direct sales to market their products. That the companies may sell different products does not mandate the conclusion that they are neither similar nor competitive. See American Standard, Inc. v. Humphrey, No. 3:06-cv-893-J-32MCR, 2007 WL 2852362, at *3 (M.D.Fla. Oct. 2, 2007) (<HOLDING>); IONA Techs., Inc. v. Walmsley, No. 021442, Options: A. holding that monitoring telephone calls is in the ordinary course of business where the employer has reason to suspect an employee of disclosing confidential information to business competitor B. holding that the intentional tort exception to employer immunity includes an objective standard to measure whether the employer engaged in conduct which was substantially certain to result in injury C. recognizing that like any market participant plaintiff likely has some legitimate interests tied up in managers that would support submitting issue of fact as to whether companies were engaged in the same or similar business even if new employer was not a direct competitor of former employer 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 unlimited geographical scope can be reasonable if the employer actually has legitimate business interests throughout the world

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that like any market participant plaintiff likely has some legitimate interests tied up in managers that would support submitting issue of fact as to whether companies were engaged in the same or similar business even if new employer was not a direct competitor of former employer
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: Comply, and cause each of its Restricted Subsidiaries to comply, with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and orders, except to the extent any non-compliance would not reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition or operations of the Company and the Restricted Subsidiaries, taken as a whole, such compliance to include, without limitation, (x) complying with all Environmental Laws and (y) paying before the same become due all Taxes imposed upon it or upon its property except to the extent contested in good faith and by proper proceedings and with respect to which appropriate reserves are being maintained.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This License Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior agreements, understandings, negotiations and discussions, whether written or oral. There are no conditions, covenants, agreements, representations, warranties or other provisions, express or implied, collateral, statutory or otherwise, relating to the subject matter hereof except as herein provided.

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: Opp. at 52-53.) An opposition to a summary judgment motion is not the place for a plaintiff to raise new claims. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a) (listing complaints, answers, and replies to cross-claims as the only forms of pleadings allowed under the rules). Plaintiffs had the opportunity to make a retaliation claim based on their suspensions in their initial complaint and in their amended complaint; they chose not to do so. Accordingly, the Court will not consider that claim at this stage. The substance of the retaliation claim that plaintiffs did make is that SecTek removed Dickerson and Waters from their supervisory positions in retaliation for their complaints about Smith’s alleged discriminatory behavior toward them. See O’Neal v. Ferguson Const. Co., 237 F.3d 1248, 1255 (10th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). In order to state a prima facie case, Options: A. holding as not protected speech a prison guards internal complaints documenting her superiors failure to respond to inmates sexually explicit behavior toward her B. holding that 510 applies to unsolicited informal complaints C. holding without discussion of the verbalwritten distinction that plaintiffs oral complaints were protected activity D. holding that informal complaints to superiors about discrimination constitute protected activity E. holding that raising a complaint about a violation of an internal policy is not considered protected activity

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that informal complaints to superiors about discrimination constitute 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you will resolve any claim , cause of action or dispute ( claim ) you have with us arising out of or relating to this statement or facebook exclusively in the u.s. district court for the northern district of california or a state court located in san mateo county , and you agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of such courts for the purpose of litigating all such claims .

assistant: Jurisdiction
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 Plan will be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of Australia, the United States of America and the State of Colorado, in each case as applicable under the circumstances. In the event of a conflict between the various laws, the Board shall determine which law is applicable.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: v. Thomas, 89 F.R.D. 639, 641 (N.D.Ill.1981), included as a reason for its denial of the defendant’s motion to strike certain errata sheets that the original answers to the deposition would remain part of the record and could be read at trial, stating that “[t]he witness who changes his testimony on a material matter between the giving of his deposition and his appearance at trial may be impeached by his former answers, and the cross-examiner and the jury are likely to be keenly interested in the reasons he changed his testimony.” In addition, district courts have provided another safeguard against abuse by allowing the deposing party to reopen the examination if the changes render the deposition useless or incomplete without additional testimony. See Tingley, 152 F.Supp.2d at 120 (<HOLDING>); Perkasie Indus. Corp. v. Advance Transformer, Options: A. holding that cjourts generally construe rule 30e broadly to permit any changes to the deposition even those having the effect of contradicting the original answers regardless of how unconvincing the deponents explanation for making the changes might be B. holding that where a jury fails to return unanimous answers to some of the questions on a special verdict form the trial judge can enter judgment on the basis of the unanimous verdicts if they are dispositive of the case C. holding that in light of the trial courts inquiry the defendants verbal responses and the defendants answers to the questions on the transcript of plea the trial court did determine that defendant was fully informed of the consequences of his choice to enter an alford plea D. holding to prove possession the state must show that a defendant possessed a certain substance the substance was illegal and he had knowledge of the presence of the substance E. holding that rule 30e allowed deponent to change the substance of his answers but reconvening the depositions for the limited purpose of inquiring into the reasons for the changed answers and where the changes originated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that rule 30e allowed deponent to change the substance of his answers but reconvening the depositions for the limited purpose of inquiring into the reasons for the changed answers and where the changes originated
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: was handcuffed. There were at least two officers present with him. The area beneath the mattress, whether Fisher was 3 or 4 feet away, or 15 feet, was simply not easily accessible to a handcuffed and guarded man, if we take a logical and reasonable approach to the word “accessible.” We note that if, on the same facts, the district court, after judging the credibility of the witnesses, had come to the conclusion that the weapon was accessible and should be allowed into evidence, and the defendant had appealed, we are not sure what our conclusion on appeal would have been. We do not need to address that hypothetical. But what we can say on appeal is that giving proper deference to the district court’s assessment of the credibility of oral testimony, we cannot say that the inn.App.1998) (<HOLDING>). Fisher argues that police lacked probable Options: A. recognizing that public utilities affect the public interest in that they render essential public services to a large number of the general public B. holding that public meeting did not satisfy public participation requirement because public did not receive adequate notice C. recognizing the public interest exception D. recognizing a public safety exception to the requirement that miranda warnings be given in order to use a suspects statement as evidence against him at trial E. holding public safety exception to miranda warning requirement did not apply where there was no evidence gun had been left in public place

assistant: The best answer is E. holding public safety exception to miranda warning requirement did not apply where there was no evidence gun had been left in public place
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Executive acknowledges that in the course of his employment with the Company and any predecessor or affiliated company, the Executive has become familiar with trade secret and other confidential information concerning Aon. The Executive further acknowledges and agrees that his services as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Risk Solutions, a Group President of Aon plc and a senior executive have been and are of special, unique, and extraordinary value to Aon, and that his material employment duties and responsibilities (including without limitation with respect to Aon strategic and other business operations, clients, prospective clients, and other employees) are global in nature and span geographic areas that extend well beyond the locations in which the Executive has been physically employed and resided. The Executive further acknowledges and agrees that it therefore is reasonable to protect Aon against certain competitive activities by the Executive for a limited period of time after the Executive leaves employment to protect Aon’s legitimate business interests in all of the geographic areas in which Aon does business, and that the covenants contained in Section 5 are necessary for the protection of Aon and are reasonably limited with respect to the activities prohibited, duration, geographical scope and their effect on the Executive and the public.

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: expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subjected to the same action again.” Weinstein v. Bradford, 423 U.S. 147, 149, 96 S.Ct. 347, 46 L.Ed.2d 350 (1975) (per curiam). There is no serious dispute that the first requirement is met here; our focus, therefore, is on whether there is a reasonable expectation that Van Wie and Wright will be prohibited from participating in a future primary election. A tension has arisen in cases applying the second prong of the Weinstein test in the elections context. Some recent election cases from the Supreme Court and this Court have steadfastly required that the same complaining party have a reasonable expectation that they will face the same action again. See Norman v. Reed, 502 U.S. 279, 288, 112 S.Ct. 698, 116 L.Ed.2d 711 (1992) (<HOLDING>); Ill. State Bd. of Elections v. Socialist Options: A. holding continuing controversy not moot B. holding that although the 1972 election had long since passed the case was not moot because the statute under review would apply to other candidates in the future C. holding that appeal was not moot despite the fact that the election had passed because there would be every reason to expect the same parties to generate a similar future controversy emphasis added D. holding that plaintiffs claims were not moot although the election was over because the same issues would affect minorparty candidacies in the future but failing to address whether fulani herself would be affected E. holding that election case was not moot after election because there is a reasonable expectation that the same complaining parties would be subject to that same action in the future

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that appeal was not moot despite the fact that the election had passed because there would be every reason to expect the same parties to generate a similar future controversy emphasis added
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: CURIAM. Gloria Harrod, Joseph Gaglioti, and Robert Gaglioti appeal a non-final order denying their Motion for Contempt and Sanctions. We treat this appeal from a non-final order as a petition for writ of certiorari, and for the following reasons, we grant the petition and quash the order under review. According to the Marital Settlement, Estela Gaglioti was to return an antique clock to Joseph.' Estela violated three court orders by not returning this clock to Joseph. Since Joseph has a pecuniary interest in the subject matter of this final order he is entitled to an Order of Contempt and Sanctions. See Orr v. Orr, 141 Fla. 112, 192 So. 466 (Fla.1939) (<HOLDING>). On remand, we direct the trial court to enter Options: A. holding that a trustee can recover damages in the form of costs and attorneys fees under section 105a as a sanction for ordinary civil contempt B. holding an order of contempt is a matter of right for someone who has a pecuniary interest such asthe payment of costs and attorneys fees in the enforcement of a final decree C. recognizing that an award of temporary attorneys fees and costs is based on an assessment of need and ability to pay as well as the reasonableness of the fees and costs D. holding defendant liable for attorneys fees when the guaranty contract at issue provided for the payment of collection costs and expenses E. holding that the plaintiff who prevailed in an ipra enforcement action was entitled to an award of damages fees and costs

assistant: The best answer is B. holding an order of contempt is a matter of right for someone who has a pecuniary interest such asthe payment of costs and attorneys fees in the enforcement of a final decree
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 constitutes the entire agreement between Executive and any of the Company Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, arrangements or agreements relating thereto, whether written or oral, including but not limited to the CIC Agreement, provided , however , that Section 8 of the CIC Agreement shall remain in effect. Executive represents that in executing this Agreement, Executive has not relied on any representation or statement not set forth herein. No amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be valid or binding on the Parties unless in writing and signed by both Parties.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Tenant shall use commercially reasonable, good faith efforts to obtain , to the extent same is available at a reasonable cost, from its contractors a warranty, for the benefit of Landlord and Tenant, warranting that Tenant's Work shall be free from defects in workmanship, materials and installation for a period of one (1) year following the completion of Tenant's Work.

assistant: Warranties
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 consideration of the payment of $ by the Assignee to the Assignor, the receipt and sufficiency of which payment are hereby acknowledged, effective on , 20 (the “ Effective Date ”), the Assignor hereby assigns to the Assignee [(or to (the “ Assignee’s Funding Agent ”) for the benefit of the Assignee)] without recourse and (except as provided below) without representation or warranty, and the Assignee hereby purchases and assumes, an undivided % interest in the Assignor’s Net Investment, together with the Assignor’s related undivided interest in the Transferred Assets (and the rights and obligations under the Receivables Purchase Agreement). The Assignor represents and warrants to the Assignee that (i) it is the Owner of the portion of the Net Investment assigned hereby and (ii) it has not created any Lien upon or with respect to the portion of the Net Investment assigned hereby. The Assignee represents to the Assignor, the Transferor, the Servicer and TMUS that its related Conduit Purchaser, if any, is a Multi-Seller Conduit.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Enstar is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of Bermuda, and has all requisite corporate power and authority to carry on the operations of its business as it is now being conducted. Prior to the Closing Date, the Retrocessionaire will be duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the Cayman Islands, and will have all requisite corporate power and authority to carry on the operations of its business as it will be conducted after the Closing Date. As of the Closing Date, each of Enstar and the Retrocessionaire will have obtained all authorizations and approvals required under Applicable Law to perform their respective obligations under the Transaction Agreements.

assistant: Organizations
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: Appeals similarly elected to address this issue on the merits. See Smith, 2014 WL 3954062, at *18-19. In light of these rather unique circumstances, we conclude that the counsel table issue was properiy preserved for appeal. To rule in favor of the State’s argument that this issue was “never contained in any valid motion for new trial, and [that] it [was] not enough that the defendant raised it orally in the motion for new trial hearing because the' defendant never reduced it to writing,” would elevate form over substance. See' Lane v. State, 316 S.W.3d 555, 568 (Tenn.2010) (rejecting argument that no guilty plea is valid unless the defendant is specifically asked “How do you plead?” because argument values form over substance)’; State v. Livingston, 197 S.W.3d 710, 716 (Tenn.2006) (<HOLDING>); Sample v. State, 82 S.W.3d 267, 281 Options: A. holding that at resentencing the state must present evidence on an enhanced sentencing factor despite having done so at the prior sentencing hearing B. holding that to rule that the defendant did not have sufficient notice of the states intent to seek enhanced sentencing would be to impose a hypertechnical procedural requirement that elevates form over substance C. holding that because resentencing following reversal is a new proceeding the state must introduce evidence that the defendant qualifies for enhanced sentencing even though such evidence was introduced in the previous sentencing hearing D. holding an allegation that defendant caused death by cutting victims throat with sharp object was sufficient to give notice of states intent to seek deadly weapon finding E. holding that absent legislative intent to impose derivative liability enhanced sentences based on the use of a weapon during a crime may not be imposed on defendants who were not personally armed

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that to rule that the defendant did not have sufficient notice of the states intent to seek enhanced sentencing would be to impose a hypertechnical procedural requirement that elevates form over substance
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 enforcement through “subterfuge.” The ethereal and speculative nature of the plaintiffs’ assertions compelled this Court to deny Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery on November 15, 2000. However, in this Order, the Court once again allowed the plaintiffs "the opportunity to attach any and all evidence in its possession of FDA enforcement of the tobacco vending machine regulations” to its Brief in Opposition to the Defendant’s Partial Motion to Dismiss. See Order of November 15, 2000. 18 . Some modern courts have questioned whether Lynch is still good law, to the extent that it stands for the proposition that all contracts generally are property that the Government may not take without just compensation. See Pro-Eco, Inc. v. Board of Com’rs, 57 F.3d 505, 510 n. 2 (7th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). 19 . The holding in United States Trust Co. Options: A. holding that the bankruptcy reform act effectively overruled wrenn B. holding that casey effectively overruled salerno C. holding that almendareztorres was not overruled by apprendi D. holding that where the relevant court of last resort has undercut the theory or reasoning underlying the prior circuit precedent in such a way that the cases are clearly irreconcilable then a threejudge panel of this court and district courts should consider themselves bound by the intervening higher authority and reject the prior opinion of this court as having been effectively overruled E. holding that lynch has been effectively overruled by subsequent cases

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that lynch has been effectively overruled by subsequent cases
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, demands, requests, consents, approvals and other communications required or permitted hereunder ( “Notices” ) must be in writing, be delivered as set forth in the Note and be effective when set forth in the Note. Regardless of the manner in which provided, Notices may be sent to a party’s address as set forth above or to such other address as any party may give to the other for such purpose in accordance with this section.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the parties hereto agrees that the Supreme Court of the State of New York sitting in the Borough of Manhattan, and of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York sitting in the Borough of Manhattan, and any appellate court from any thereof, shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine any suit, action or proceeding, and to settle any disputes, which may arise out of or in connection with this Agreement and, for such purposes, submits to the jurisdiction of such courts. Each of the parties hereto waives any objection which it might now or hereafter have to such New York State or, to the extent permitted by law, such U.S. federal court being nominated as the forum to hear and determine any suit, action or proceeding, and to settle any disputes, which may arise out of or in connection with this Agreement and agrees not to claim that any such court is not a convenient or appropriate forum. Each of the parties hereto agrees that the process by which any suit, action or proceeding is begun in such New York State or U.S. federal court may be served on it by being delivered in connection with any such suit, action or proceeding directly to its address determined for such party pursuant to Section 13.02 or in the applicable Serviced Group Member Supplement or, in the case of any Served Group Member who does not have a place of business in the United States, to the Person named as the process agent of such party (each such process agent, a “ Process Agent ”) in such Serviced Group Member Supplement. Nothing in this Agreement will affect the right of any party to this Agreement to serve process in any other manner permitted by law. Each of the parties hereto hereby consents generally in respect of any legal action or proceeding arising out of or in connection with this Agreement to the giving of any relief or the issue of any process in connection with such action or proceeding, including the making, enforcement or execution against any property whatsoever (irrespective of its use or intended use) of any order or judgment which may be made or given in such action or proceeding.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, except that neither the Company nor any other Loan Party may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the Administrative Agent and each Lender and no Lender may assign or otherwise transfer any of its rights or obligations hereunder except (i) to an assignee in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b) of this Section, (ii) by way of participation in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this Section, or (iii) by way of pledge or assignment of a security interest subject to the restrictions of subsection (f) of this Section (and any other attempted assignment or transfer by any party hereto shall be null and void). Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, shall be construed to confer upon any Person (other than the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns permitted hereby, Participants to the extent provided in subsection (d) of this Section and, to the extent expressly contemplated hereby, the Related Parties of each of the Administrative Agent, the L/C Issuers and the Lenders) any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement.

assistant: Successors
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 expressly provided herein (including Section 6.05 hereof), all costs and expenses, including, fees and disbursements of counsel, financial advisors and accountants, incurred in connection with this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby shall be paid by the party incurring such costs and expenses, whether or not the Closing shall have occurred.

assistant: Expenses
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: summary judgments de novo. Blanchard v. Brazos Forest Products, L.P., 353 S.W.3d 569, 571 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2011, pet. denied); Tex.R.Civ.P. 166a(c). We consider the evidence presented in the light most favorable to the non movant, crediting evidence favorable to the non movant if reasonable jurors could, and disregarding evidence contrary to the non movant unless reasonable jurors could not. Cunningham v. Zurich American Ins. Co., 352 S.W.3d 519, 524 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2011, pet. filed). When a trial court does not specify the grounds on which the judgment is based, we will affirm the judgment if it is correct on any legal theory expressly placed at issue and supported by the evidence. Tex.R.Civ.P. 166a(c); Dow Chem. Co. v. Francis, 46 S.W.3d 237, 242 (Tex.2001) (per curiam)(<HOLDING>). As Appellee asserted alternative grounds for Options: A. holding this court may affirm on any grounds supported by the record even if different from the district courts grounds B. holding that we may affirm a district court if its holding was right for any reason C. holding where movant asserts several grounds in support of its summary judgment motion and the trial court does not specify the grounds on which judgment was granted the reviewing court can affirm the judgment if any of the grounds are meritorious D. holding we may affirm on any grounds supported by the record even those not relied upon by the district court E. holding that when the grounds for the ruling are not specified we affirm if any of the theories advanced are meritorious

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that when the grounds for the ruling are not specified we affirm if any of the theories advanced are meritorious
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 Borrower shall provide to the Administrative Agent (i) substantially contemporaneously with the delivery thereof to the ABL Administrative Agent or any lenders under the ABL Credit Agreement, copies of all reports, documents and notices delivered under Sections (b), (d) and (i) of Schedule 5.1 to the ABL Credit Agreement and Sections (a)-(i) and (n) of Schedule 5.2 to the ABL Credit Agreement to the ABL Administrative Agent or any ABL Lender, and (ii) promptly upon the execution thereof, copies of all amendments, supplements, consents and waivers with respect to any ABL Credit Documents.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: demonstrate that "the official being sued subjectively perceived facts from which to infer substantial risk to the prisoner, that he did in fact draw the inference, and that he then disregarded that risk." Comstock v. McCrary, 273 F.3d 693, 703 (6th Cir.2001) (citing Farmer, 511 U.S. at 837, 114 S.Ct. 1970). It is not enough that an official "fail[s] to alleviate a significant risk that he should have perceived but did not." Farmer, 511 U.S. at 838, 114 S.Ct. 1970. The proposition that deliberate indifference to a prisoner's medical needs can amount to a constitutional violation has been well-settled since Estelle in 1976. Moreover, numerous decisions have involved the withholding or delayed administration of medication. See, e.g., Canady v. Wilkinson, 90 Fed.Appx. 863 (6th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); Dozier v. Pauley, 24 Fed.Appx. 398 (6th Options: A. holding that the preindictment delay was a due process violation because actual prejudice was shown and the state had shown absolutely no need for any investigative delay B. holding that delay in prescription was not eighth amendment violation because delay was inadvertent and quickly rectified C. holding that a twoday delay was insufficient to establish deliberate indifference and citing cases where no deliberate indifference was found after a sixteenday delay a sixday delay and a threemonth delay D. holding that prescription delay was not violation because plaintiff could not establish detrimental effect of delay in treatment E. holding that twoyear delay was not reasonable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that delay in prescription was not eighth amendment violation because delay was inadvertent and quickly rectified
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any of the Mortgaged Property shall be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of by Mortgagor in a transaction permitted by the Purchase Agreement, such Mortgaged Property shall be automatically released from the Lien of this Mortgage without further action on the part of Mortgagor or the Mortgagee, and shall cease to constitute collateral hereunder, and then Mortgagee, at the request and sole expense of Mortgagor, shall execute and deliver to Mortgagor all releases or other documents reasonably necessary or desirable for the release of the Liens created hereby on such Mortgaged Property. Last Dollars Secured; Priority.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of the late charge specified in the contract, but rather that the charge should be deemed unenforceable because “it was grossly disproportionate to any damages that may be sustained by the late payment of any cable bill.” Id. at *1. Wells Fargo contends that, as in Hall and Sanchez, there is no dispute in the instant case that the Loan Agreement contained an enforceable obligation that Sundance pay a prepayment premium and that the parties simply disagree as to the calculation of that prepayment. Sundance, however, cites a series of cases for the proposition that Section 725.04 clearly applies to claims to recover overpayments that were unenforceable based on the parties’ contract. See, e.g., Sensormatic Sec. Corp. v. Sensormatic Electronics Corp., 249 F.Supp.2d 703, 710-12 (D.Md.2003) (<HOLDING>); Saglio v. Chrysler First Commercial Corp., Options: A. holding that a clause making payment by the owner an express condition precedent to payment by the general contractor to the subcontractor was enforceable B. holding that a paywhenpaid clause does not preclude a subcontractors recovery under the miller act payment bond because the federal legislation conditions payment of the subcontractor not on payment by the government to the contractor but rather on the passage of time from completion of the work or provision of materials C. holding that it was not essential to an action by a supplier on a payment bond under the miller act that a demand be made on the general contractor for payment although there was evidence in the case from which it could be found that the materialman looked to the general contractor for payment since the statute does not require a demand for payment but merely requires written notice of the claim D. holding that the term reverse payment is not limited to a cash payment E. holding that section 72504 barred application of voluntary payment defense to payment of excessive commissions

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that section 72504 barred application of voluntary payment defense to payment of excessive commissions
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: Waivers . No amendment to or waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it shall be in writing and signed by the parties hereto. Any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement may be waived in writing at any time by the party entitled to the benefits thereof.

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: As of the date hereof, you will serve as Chief Financial Officer (or such other position as may be assigned by the President of the Company (the “ President ”), the Chief Executive Officer of the Company (“ CEO ”) or the Board of Directors of the Company (the “ Board ”)). You will have the duties and authority as determined from time to time by the President, the CEO or the Board. While employed by the Company, you will devote your full business time and best efforts to the performance of your duties hereunder and the business and affairs of the Company and will not engage in any other business, profession or occupation for compensation or otherwise which would conflict or interfere with the rendition of such services to the Company, without the Board’s prior written consent. While employed by the Company, you will be expected to primarily work from the Company’s office in Indianapolis, IN.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: because, under the circumstances discussed above, a reasonable attorney would have done more investigation at the initial stage and later on in the course of the litiga tion, there has been an insufficient showing of complete bad faith in bringing this action. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, the court hereby concludes that a Rule 11(c)(1)(B) sanction is to be imposed on Mr. Lee Nuwestra in the amount of $25,000.00 payable to defendants in payment of their counsel fees. 1 . Plaintiff also brought a complaint under the New York State Executive law which was dismissed on the ground that a prior proceeding before the New York City Human Rights Commission collaterally estopped him from pursuing this claim. See Forbes v. Merrill Lynch et al., 957 F.Supp. 450 (S.D.N.Y.1997) (<HOLDING>). 2 . Plaintiff alleged in his complaint that Options: A. holding that probable cause determination presents a mixed question of law and fact B. holding that the commissions no probable cause determination was decisive C. holding that a probable cause determination is appropriate for summary judgment where there are no genuine issues of material fact and no credibility issues D. holding fabrication not protected because no probable cause E. holding that a determination of probable cause does not bar a state law malicious prosecution claim where the claim is based on the police officers supplying false information to establish probable cause

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the commissions no probable cause determination was decisive
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No Party will, without the prior written consent of the other Parties, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, assign, mortgage, pledge or otherwise convey this Agreement or any of its rights or duties hereunder; provided , however , that any Party may assign or convey this Agreement without the prior written consent of any other Party to an Affiliate. Collateral assignment of this Agreement shall be an assignment for all purposes, requiring the consent of the other Parties.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: notwithstanding any intellectual property rights you may have in your content or any expenditure on your part , linden lab and you expressly disclaim any compensable value relating to or attributable to any data relating to your account residing on linden lab 's servers .

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: (1995) or the commentary to USSG § 2G2.2 (1995). Specifically, neither the plain language of USSG § 2G2.2(b)(4) (1995) nor the commentary to USSG § 2G2.2 (1995) necessarily included the trafficking in material relating to the sexual abuse or exploitation of a minor in the term “sexual abuse or exploitation of a minor” as found in USSG § 2G2.2(b)(4) (1995). Instead, the term “sexual abuse or exploitation of a minor” is ambiguous in the sense that it is reasonably susceptible to both an interpretation including the trafficking in material relating to the sexual abuse or exploitation of a minor and an interpretation not including such conduct. In addition, at the time of the amendment there was no Fourth Circuit precedent contrary to the amendment. Cf. Capers, 61 F.3d at 1110-11 (<HOLDING>). Under these circumstances, we accept the Options: A. holding reves standard narrower than existing second circuit precedent B. holding that a condition was precedent to performance because the contract language did not explicitly state that it was precedent to formation C. holding a guideline amendment substantive primarily because it contradicted existing circuit precedent D. holding that a three judge panel is not bound by prior circuit precedent if an intervening decision of a higher authority undercuts the theory or reasoning underlying the prior circuit precedent in such a way that the cases are clearly irreconcilable E. holding that an intervening supreme court case can overturn circuit precedent

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a guideline amendment substantive primarily because it contradicted existing circuit precedent
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: exceptions to agreement to arbitrate : either you or fitbit may assert claims , if they qualify , in small claims court in san francisco ( ca ) or any united states county where you live or work .

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: 96 T.C. 845, 1991 WL 106265 (1991), aff'd by unpublished opinion, 988 F.2d 120 (9th Cir.1993): We quite agree that Congress was concerned with putting an end to the abuses reflected in Clay Brown and University Hill. But, although it focused on those particular abuses, the provisions which it enacted were couched in broader terms, and were not limited precisely to those situations. This is but another instance of Congress’ going beyond the evil which it seeks to correct in closing a loophole. In the words of Judge Friendly in Commissioner v. Pepsi-Cola Niagara Bottling Corp., 399 F.2d 390, 392 (2d Cir.1968), “a legislature seeking to catch a particular abuse may find it necessary to cast a wider net.” Kern County Elec., 96 T.C. at 853; see also Elliot Knitwear, 614 F.2d at 350 (<HOLDING>). In short, we find no basis for ignoring the Options: A. holding that absent unusual circumstances this court must apply the plain meaning of a statute B. holding that although purchase of securities on margin does not seem to present source of unfair competition both plain meaning of statute and congressional intent support imposition of ubit on this type of income C. holding that imposition of ubit does not necessarily require showing of actual competition D. holding securities purchased on margin are subject to ubit as marginfinanced securities are debtfinanced property and 514a requires treating income derived therefrom as income from unrelated trade or business E. holding that general statement of intent does not override plain language of statute

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that although purchase of securities on margin does not seem to present source of unfair competition both plain meaning of statute and congressional intent support imposition of ubit on this type of income
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: we are providing our services on an `` as is '' basis without any express or implied warranties , including , but not limited to , warranties of merchantability , fitness for a particular purpose , title , non-infringement , and freedom from computer virus or other harmful code .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Notice, including the Plan and any additional documents necessary to effect the terms and conditions of your Award, constitutes the entire understanding and agreement among the parties, and there are no other agreements, understandings, restrictions, or representations, other than those set forth herein.

assistant: Entire Agreements