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: who has pled guilty in an open plea to challenge the sentence imposed is to file a direct appeal or, if the time for filing a direct appeal has run, to file an appeal under [Indiana Post-Convietion Rule] 2," rather than filing a post-conviction relief petition. The trial court subsequently granted Sullivan permission to pursue this belated appeal challenging his sentence. The State does not argue that Sullivan cannot invoke Blakely with respect to a sentencing hearing that was conducted in 1999. It was correct not to make such an argument. The Indiana Supreme Court's rule that precludes retroactive application of new criminal rules to collateral proceedings does not apply to direct appeals brought pursuant to Post-Conviction Rule 2. Fosha v. State, 747 N.E.2d 549, 552 (Ind.2001) (<HOLDING>). "New rules for the conduct of criminal Options: A. holding that the granting of an application to file an appeal out of time is considered part of the direct appeal process under oklahoma law B. holding on appeal from a habeas corpus denial that counsel was not ineffective for failure to file a notice of appeal because of defendants escape C. holding that defendants claim based on richardson v state 717 ne2d 32 ind1999 would be considered on the merits where defendant was convicted in 1993 and did not originally timely file a direct appeal but in 1999 was granted permission to file a belated appeal D. holding that counsels failure to file appeal was not deficient performance under strickland where the petitioner in 2255 action did not direct counsel to file an appeal and acquiesced in counsels decision to pursue as an alternative a reduction in sentence E. holding that where the fourth amendment question was raised at trial but not preserved on direct appeal in the state court the defendants failure to raise the issue on appeal in the state courts did not suffice to avoid stone

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that defendants claim based on richardson v state 717 ne2d 32 ind1999 would be considered on the merits where defendant was convicted in 1993 and did not originally timely file a direct appeal but in 1999 was granted permission to file a belated appeal
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: this statement of rights and responsibilities ( `` statement , '' `` terms , '' or `` srr '' ) derives from the facebook principles , and is our terms of service that governs our relationship with users and others who interact with facebook , as well as facebook brands , products and services , which we call the `` facebook services '' or `` services '' .

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: Each Borrower hereby (a) renews and affirms the Liens created and granted in the Loan Documents, and (b) agrees that this Amendment shall in no manner affect or impair the Liens securing the Obligations, and that such Liens shall not in any manner be waived, the purposes of this Amendment being to modify the Loan Agreement as herein provided, and to carry forward all Liens securing the same, which are acknowledged by such Borrower to be valid and subsisting.

assistant: Liens
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: Neither Party may assign, transfer or convey any right, obligation or duty, in whole or in part, or of any other interest under this Agreement relating to such Corporate Services or Transition Assistance without the prior written consent of the other Party, including any assignment, transfer or conveyance in connection with a sale of an asset to which one or more of the Corporate Services or Transition Assistance relate. All obligations and duties of a Party under this Agreement shall be binding on all successors in interest and permitted assigns of such Party. Each Party may use its Subsidiaries or Affiliates or subcontractors to perform the Corporate Services or Transition Assistance; provided , that such use shall not relieve such assigning Party of liability for its responsibilities and obligations hereunder.

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: The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the other Loan Documents by the Borrower (a) do not require, on the part of Borrower, any consent or approval of, registration or filing with, or any other action by, any Governmental Authority, (b) will not violate any provision of the certificate of incorporation or the by-laws of the Borrower or any provision of any law or regulation presently in effect or any order of any Governmental Authority having applicability to the Borrower, (c) will not result in, or require, the creation or imposition of any Lien on any of the Borrower’s properties or revenues pursuant to any requirement of law, and (d) will not violate or result in a default under any indenture, agreement or other instrument to which the Borrower is a party and which is binding upon the Borrower or its assets in any case in which the consequences of such violation or default would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any notice required or permitted to be given to Executive pursuant to this Agreement shall be sufficiently given if sent to Executive by registered or certified mail addressed to Executive at 110 Pitts Bay Road, Pembroke HM 08 Bermuda, or at such other address as Executive shall designate by written notice to the Company, and any notice required or permitted to be given to the Company pursuant to this Agreement shall be sufficiently given if sent to the Company by registered or certified mail addressed to it at 110 Pitts Bay Road, Pembroke HM 08 Bermuda, Attn: General Counsel, or at such other address as it shall designate by notice to Executive.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the sharing of forum fees is authorized by NASD rules, and that arbitration is generally less expensive than litigation, the assessment of half of the forum fees against Sobol will neither discourage arbitration nor offend public policy. IV. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to confirm the NASD panel arbitration award is granted. Plaintiffs motion to vacate the $25,650 arbitration fee assessed against her is denied. SO ORDERED: 1 . Sobol initially commenced three actions against Kidder Peabody in federal court which were consolidated before Judge Leva! However, Sobol was required to proceed in arbitration before the NASD pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 111 S.Ct. 1647, 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991) (<HOLDING>). The NASD is a self-regulatory association of Options: A. holding that employees could be required under mandatory securities registration form to arbitrate claims brought under adea B. holding that a nasd member is required to arbitrate claims brought by the customer of an associated person C. holding unconscionable an arbitration agreement requiring employees to arbitrate claims against the employer but not requiring the employer to arbitrate claims against the employees D. holding no individual liability under the adea E. holding that mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting approach applies to claims brought under the adea

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that employees could be required under mandatory securities registration form to arbitrate claims brought under adea
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 will use the proceeds of (a) the Initial Term Loans to pay Transaction Costs and for working capital requirements and for general corporate purposes of the Borrower or its Subsidiaries, including the financing of acquisitions, other Investments and dividends and other distributions on account of the Equity Interests of the Borrower (or any Parent Entity thereof), in each case permitted hereunder and (b) the Revolving Loans and Swingline Loans for working capital requirements and other general corporate purposes of the Borrower or its Subsidiaries, including the financing of acquisitions, other Investments and dividends and other distributions on account of the Equity Interests of the Borrower (or any Parent Entity thereof), in each case permitted hereunder.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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: as "encouraged" for departure. The overbreadth of this interpretation is apparent. In reality, the Court specified that this definition applied to the particular factors cited in Part 5K. Before rendering the definition, the Court stated: "The Commission provides considerable guidance as to the factors that are apt or not apt to make a case atypical, by listing certain factors as either encouraged or discouraged bases for departure.” Koon, 518 U.S. at 94, 116 S.Ct. 2035. A panel of this circuit has even mislabeled an analogous factor as "encouraged” under this broad definition. See United States v. Shumway, 112 F.3d 1413, 1428 (10th Cir.1997). Because that mischaracterization was dicta, we are not bound by it. See, e.g., Bates v. Dep’t of Corrections, 81 F.3d 1008, 1011 (10th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); see also OXY USA, Inc. v. Babbitt, 230 F.3d Options: A. holding that a panel of this court cannot overturn a prior panels decision B. holding that a panel of this court is bound by a holding of a prior panel but is not bound by a prior panels dicta C. holding that one panel of this court is not bound by dicta in a previously published panel opinion D. holding that court is bound by prior panels interpretation of supreme court decision E. holding that a prior panel decision is binding on subsequent panels

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a panel of this court is bound by a holding of a prior panel but is not bound by a prior panels dicta
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 duties assigned to DEA agents, and therefore, DEA agents do not meet the test set forth in H. Landau. Cruz-Pagan, 35 Fed.Cl. at 61-62. Alternatively, the Court held that DEA agents could not have implied actual authority because DEA’s “internal regulations specifically preclude [them] from exercising such authority.” Id. at 62-63 (explaining that section 6612.45 of the DEA Agent’s Manual controls the manner in which such awards may be approved, the persons who are permitted to approve such awards, and expressly prohibits agents from promising “any award in any amount to an individual”). In each of the subsequent cases in which the implied actual authority issue was addressed, the Court has agreed with the conclusion drawn in Cruz-Pagan. Doe v. United States, 48 Fed.Cl. at 503 (<HOLDING>); Khairallah, 43 Fed.Cl. at 62-63 (concluding Options: A. holding that while a purported agent must possess actual authority to accept service of process such authority may be implied rather than express B. holding that a principal is not hable for the actions of an agent when these actions exceed the agents authority and the thirdparty has knowledge that the agent does not have the authority asserted C. holding that dea agents lack implied actual authority because contracting authority is not an integral part of their duties and deas internal procedures expressly preclude dea agents from exercising contractual authority D. holding that when an agent has limited authority and informs the third party of this limitation the principal is not bound by the agents actions that exceed that authority E. holding that the principal is liable for an agents acts committed within the scope of the agents employment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that dea agents lack implied actual authority because contracting authority is not an integral part of their duties and deas internal procedures expressly preclude dea agents from exercising contractual authority
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: trustee’s] duties and powers is determined by the trust instrument and the rules of law which are applicable.” Restatement (Second) Of TRüsts § 201 (1959). Accordingly, even though the IIM trust is a trust, as that term is used in Mitchell II, plaintiffs must point to rights granted by statute if they are to be enforced against the government. There is simply no persuasive basis for doing so on a purely common-law basis. In summary, it does not matter whether plaintiffs rely upon a traditional statutory analysis of their rights against the government through APA and non-statutory review or, on the other hand, whether they claim to be beneficiaries of a trust created under the terms of Mitchell II (which must be enforced through one of these other mechanisms in . 252, 257 (D.D.C.1972) (<HOLDING>). Nonetheless, the court is compelled to follow Options: A. holding that the secretary of the interior breached the united states duty of loyalty despite the absence of any applicable treaty or statutory provision B. recognizing that an attorney has a duty of loyalty to his client C. holding that the united states was a statutory employer under kansas law D. holding that despite plaintiffs allegations of a conspiracy they did not suggest that any of the acts committed by individual defendants occurred in the united states E. holding that the substantial relationship test also concerns the duty of loyalty to a former client

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the secretary of the interior breached the united states duty of loyalty despite the absence of any applicable treaty or statutory provision
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: Regardless of any action the Company, or if different, Awardee’s employer (the “Employer”) takes with respect to any or all income tax, social insurance, payroll tax, fringe benefits tax, payment on account or other tax-related items related to Awardee’s participation in the Plan and legally applicable to Awardee (“Tax-Related Items”), Awardee acknowledges that the ultimate liability for all Tax-Related Items is and remains his responsibility and that such liability may exceed the amount actually withheld by the Company or the Employer. Awardee further acknowledges that the Company and/or the Employer (i) make no representations or undertakings regarding the treatment of any Tax-Related Items in connection with any aspect of the Restricted Stock Units, including, but not limited to, the grant, vesting or settlement of the Restricted Stock Units, the issuance of Stock upon settlement of the Restricted Stock Units, the subsequent sale of Stock and the receipt of any dividends and/or any dividend equivalents; and (ii) do not commit to and are under no obligation to structure the terms of the grant or any aspect of the Restricted Stock Units to reduce or eliminate Awardee’s liability for Tax-Related Items or achieve any particular tax result. Further, if Awardee has become subject to tax in more than one jurisdiction between the Award Date and the date of any relevant taxable or tax withholding event, as applicable, Awardee acknowledges that the Company and/or the Employer (or former employer, as applicable) may be required to withhold or account for Tax-Related Items in more than one jurisdiction.

assistant: Tax Withholdings
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: From and after the date of this Agreement (including, without limitation, following the Closing Date), Sellers and Buyer agree to do such things, perform such acts, and make, execute, acknowledge and deliver such documents as may be reasonably necessary or proper and usual to complete the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and to carry out the purpose of this Agreement in accordance with 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: unusual, we start with a brief background of the underlying action for which this EAJA award is sought. On November 1, 2011, the Board issued a decision that (1) denied Mr. Garsow’s claim for disability compensation for bilateral hearing loss, (2) remanded his claim for benefits for an acquired psychiatric disorder and tinnitus, and (3) granted his claim for bilateral peripheral neuropathy of the left and right lower extremities (neuropa-thy). On January 9, 2012, under docket number 12-0103, Mr. Garsow timely submitted a Notice of Appeal (NOA) from the November 2011 decision. By operation of law, however, our jurisdiction over the appeal was limited to the Board’s 2011 denial of Mr. Garsow’s claim for benefits for bilateral hearing loss. See Hibbard v. West, 13 Vet.App. 546, 548 (2000) (<HOLDING>). On January 23, 2012, apparently without Options: A. holding that cue review applies only to prior final decisions of agencies of original jurisdiction ros and not to prior decisions of the board B. holding that taxpayer could not have presented substantive due process claim to the board of assessment review because of the limited jurisdiction of that board C. holding that the courts jurisdiction is limited to the appeal of final board decisions that are adverse to the claimant D. holding that this courts review of board decisions is limited to final orders or final decisions E. holding appeal of termination is limited to information that is part of the record

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the courts jurisdiction is limited to the appeal of final board decisions that are adverse to the claimant
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: appellee’s monthly benefits. Res judicata bars subsequent litigation of questions of law which |swere not litigated, but could have been determined in the original litigation. American Standard, Inc. v. Miller Eng’g, Inc., 299 Ark. 347, 772 S.W.2d 344 (1989). Under this doctrine, relitigation in a subsequent suit is barred when (1) the first suit resulted in a judgment on the merits; (2) the first suit was based upon proper jurisdiction; (3) the first suit was fully contested in good faith; (4) both suits involve the same claim or cause of action which was litigated or could have been litigated but was not; and (5) both suits involve the same parties or their privies. Id. This doctrine applies when the litigation is resolved by an agreement entered into between the parties. See F 2009) (<HOLDING>). | f,Appellant’s second point on appeal is his Options: A. holding that appellants failure to challenge the trial courts appointment of an allegedly biased expert witness precluded appellant from raising the issue on appeal B. holding that the failure to obtain a ruling on a motion for new trial waives the issues raised for appellate review C. holding failure to argue elements or obtain ruling on judicial estoppel precluded review D. holding that a party must obtain a distinct ruling on an issue in order to raise it on appeal E. holding that appellants failure to obtain a ruling at the trial level even on a constitutional issue precluded review on appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that appellants failure to obtain a ruling at the trial level even on a constitutional issue precluded review on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 474 U.S. 120 106 S.Ct. 553 88 L.Ed.2d 418 LAKE COAL COMPANY, INC.v.ROBERTS & SCHAEFER CO. No. 84-1240 Supreme Court of the United States December 3, 1985 On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion of the parties requesting the Court to decide the questions presented in the petition for writ of certiorari despite complete settlement of the underlying causes of action is denied. See DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312, 94 S.Ct. 1704, 40 L.Ed.2d 164 (1974). 2 The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky with instructions to dismiss the cause as moot.

assistant: 9
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There is no action, proceeding or investigation pending with respect to which any Seller Party or either Guarantor has received service of process or, to the best of such Seller Party’s or either Guarantor’s knowledge threatened against it before any court, administrative agency or other tribunal (A) asserting the invalidity of any Program Agreement, (B) seeking to prevent the consummation of any of the transactions contemplated by any Program Agreement, (C) making a claim individually or in the aggregate in an amount greater than (x) $10,000,000 against any Seller, Underlying Repurchase Counterparty or any of their Affiliates or (y) $250,000 against REO Subsidiary, (D) which requires filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission in accordance with the 1934 Act or any rules thereunder or (E) which might materially and adversely affect the validity of the Purchased Assets, Mortgage Loans or Contributed Assets or the performance by it of its obligations under, or the validity or enforceability of any Program Agreement.

assistant: Litigations
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: had to inquire into each deposit compared with the relatively simple procedure a customer could follow — by depositing the funds into a separate account, with proper notice to the bank, and keeping the funds segregated — to ensure that the funds remain exempt. Id. That portion of Bemardini holding that funds in a bank account lost their special status when commingled with a debtor’s general funds has been followed by the Fourth Circuit. Alexander & Jones v. Sovran Bank, N.A. (In re Nat Warren Contracting Co.), 905 F.2d 716, 718-19 (4th Cir.1990). But see NCNB Financial Servs., Inc. v. Shumate, 829 F.Supp. 178, 180-81 (W.D.Va.1993), aff'd sub nom. Nationsbank of North Carolina, N.A. v. Shumate, 45 F.3d 427 (4th Cir.1994), cert. den. 515 U.S. 1161, 115 S.Ct. 2616, 132 L.Ed.2d 859 (1995) (<HOLDING>); In re Woolard, 23 Collier Bankr.Cas. 59 Options: A. holding that 407a imposes a broad bar against the use of any legal process to reach all social security benefits B. holding that use of social security benefits satisfied child support obligation C. holding that under 42 usc 407a social security benefits commingled with other nonexempt funds in a bank account remain exempt if the funds are reasonably traceable to social security income on a firstin firstout basis D. holding a social security number is not private E. holding that the express language of 407a and the clear intent of congress that social security benefits not be attachable

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that under 42 usc 407a social security benefits commingled with other nonexempt funds in a bank account remain exempt if the funds are reasonably traceable to social security income on a firstin firstout basis
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: 7. The Parties agree and understand that, notwithstanding any pending or future disputes between them or any claims relating to or arising from such disputes, the provision of the Information is not intended to and should not be construed as a waiver of any confidentiality or privilege over such material for any other purpose and such confidentiality and privileges are expressly reserved.

assistant: No
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Upon commencement of the offering of the Placement Shares under this Agreement (and upon the recommencement of the offering of the Placement Shares under this Agreement following any termination of a suspension of sales hereunder), and at each Applicable Time, the Company shall be deemed to have affirmed each representation, warranty, covenant and other agreement contained in this Agreement.

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: Company understands, acknowledges and agrees that: (A) Dealer and its affiliates may buy or sell Shares or other securities or buy or sell options or futures contracts or enter into or unwind swaps or other derivative securities for its own account in connection with the termination or amendment of the Issuer Warrant Transactions; (B) Dealer and its affiliates also may be active in the market for Shares other than in connection with hedging activities in relation to the termination or amendment of the Issuer Warrant Transactions; (C) Dealer shall make its own determination as to whether, when or in what manner any hedging or market activities in securities of Company shall be conducted and shall do so in a manner that it deems appropriate to hedge its price and market risk with respect to the payment required under this Agreement; (D) any market activities of Dealer and its affiliates with respect to Shares may affect the market price and volatility of Shares, each in a manner that may be adverse to Company and (E) Dealer may purchase or sell shares for its own account at an average price that may be greater than, or less than, any price paid by or to Company in connection with the termination or amendment of the Issuer Warrant Transactions.

assistant: 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: This Amendment may be executed in counterparts (and by different parties hereto on different counterparts), each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute a single contract. Images of signatures transmitted by facsimile or other electronic transmission ( e.g. , .pdf) shall be effective as originals.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: facts that Stanley Machinery was not doing business in Texas, had not consummated the complained-of transaction in Texas, and that the cause of action did not arise from some act or transaction in Texas. See id. at 793-94; see also Hayes v. Wissel, 882 S.W.2d 97 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1994, no writ) (relying on C.W. Brown in affirmance of special appearance). C-Loc’s entering into a sales agreement with Hendrix in itself does not establish purposeful availment. See Burger King Corp., 471 U.S. at 478, 105 S.Ct. 2174; Temperature Sys., Inc., 854 S.W.2d at 675. Nor is the shipment of the materials from Michigan to Texas sufficient to justify an exercise of personal jurisdiction. See Stuart v. Spademan, 772 F.2d 1185, 1193 (5th Cir.1985) (citing Loumar v. Smith, 698 F.2d 759 (5th Cir.1983) (<HOLDING>)). Moreover, like the plaintiff in C.W. Brown, Options: A. holding there was no general jurisdiction when there was no evidence that defendants advertised or promoted their goods or services in texas solicited business in texas sold their goods or services to a texas entity established a general business office or general business presence in texas or targeted texas markets B. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident guarantor of debt to texas creditor based only on sending a guaranty agreement to texas and discussing the general pattern of texas cases holding likewise C. holding that jurisdiction existed over nonresident printing customer despite the fact that texas printer solicited the business in alabama and nonresident sent no personnel to texas because nonresident placed additional orders from which it expected to profit sent payments to texas sent and received printing materials to and from texas paid for shipping of printed goods from texas and sent payments to texas the transactions were governed by texas law and substantial part of performance occurred in texas D. holding no jurisdiction over nonresident customer where contract was solicited negotiated and consummated in oklahoma for billboards to be built in texas and erected in oklahoma payments were made to texas and defendant would not earn a profit from texas and had no other contact with texas E. holding nonresident partnership not subject to personal jurisdiction of texas court although it sold and shipped to texas plaintiff goods that were subject of breach of contract claim

assistant: The best answer is E. holding nonresident partnership not subject to personal jurisdiction of texas court although it sold and shipped to texas plaintiff goods that were subject of breach of contract claim
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 Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries (a) has filed or caused to be filed all federal, state, provincial and other Tax returns that are required to be filed and (b) has paid or caused to be paid all taxes shown to be due and payable on said returns and all other taxes, fees or other charges imposed on it or on any of its Property by any Governmental Authority (other than (i) any returns or amounts that are not yet due or (ii) amounts the validity of which are currently being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and with respect to which any reserves required in conformity with GAAP have been provided on the books of the Borrower or such Restricted Subsidiary, as the case may be), except in each case where the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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: ... for purposes of the restitution statute, I.C. 35-50-5-3, it substitutes for the civil judgment which is normally the basis for a judgment lien. Because the trial court must base its restitution order upon evidence of the crime victim's actual loss, the victim is not obliged to subsequently pursue an independent civil action for money damages to enforce the restitution order, when the sole purpose of such an action would be to establish the amount of its loss. Id. at 458-59 (emphases added). 2 . The State does not suggest that the issue raised by M.M. on appeal — the juvenile court’s authority to continue his restitution obligation despite M.M.'s discharge from probation — is moot in light of M.M.’s discharge from probation. Cf. Tharp v. State, 942 N.E.2d 814, 816 n. 1 (Ind.2011) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added). 3 . M.M. does not challenge Options: A. holding that a probationers challenge to a condition of his probation was moot in light of the supreme courts reversal of the underlying conviction and the probationers apparent completion of probation B. holding that probationer failed to satisfy the donaldson test for determining if a probation condition is not reasonably related to the probationers rehabilitation and therefore the trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing random urinalysis as a condition of probation C. holding search provision in probation order constitute a reasonable and necessary element of the courts regulation of probationers which did not require the defendants consent D. holding unanimously that a warrantless search of a probationers apartment that was supported by reasonable suspicion and authorized as a condition of his probation was reasonable within the meaning of the fourth amendment E. holding that probationer failed to satisfy two of the three prongs of the donaldson test for determining if a probation condition was reasonably related to the probationers rehabilitation and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing random urinalysis as a condition of probation

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a probationers challenge to a condition of his probation was moot in light of the supreme courts reversal of the underlying conviction and the probationers apparent completion of probation
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 software is being licensed to you and you hereby acknowledge that no title or ownership in the software is being transferred or assigned and this eula is not to be construed as a sale of any rights in the software .

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: subject to the aaa rules , the arbitrator will have the discretion to direct a reasonable exchange of information by the parties , consistent with the expedited nature of the arbitration .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the victim of a crime prevents a sentencing court from ordering restitution. The other circuits, however, have generally held that “a release by the victim does not preclude or cap restitution of losses as part of criminal sentencing in a case where there is no double recovery.” United States v. Parsons, 141 F.3d 386, 393 (1st Cir.1998) (citing United States v. Savoie, 985 F.2d 612, 619 (1st Cir.1993)); see also United States v. Sheinbaum, 136 F.3d 443, 448 (5th Cir.1998) (concluding “that district courts possess the discretion to impose restitution orders in spite of civil settlements” because of “the rehabilitative and retributive functions” of restitution), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1133, 119 S.Ct. 1808, 143 L.Ed.2d 1011 (1999); United States v. Vetter, 895 F.2d 456, 459 (8th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Hairston, 888 F.2d 1349, Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs lawsuit which was filed despite a general release in the parties settlement agreement constituted a material breach of the settlement agreement B. holding that a district court may order restitution despite a settlement agreement C. holding that the existence of a prior bankruptcy settlement does not preclude a subsequent criminal restitution order D. holding that a settlement agreement is not a court order and therefore a violation of the settlement agreement would not subject a party to contempt E. holding that equitable restitution is available but that legal restitution is not

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a district court may order restitution despite a settlement agreement
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 shall be governed by and its provisions construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, as applied to contracts between Delaware residents entered into and to be performed entirely within Delaware, without regard to the conflict of law principles thereof. The Corporation and Indemnitee each hereby irrevocably consents to the jurisdiction of the state courts of the State of Delaware for all purposes in connection with any Proceeding which arises out of or relates to this Agreement and agree that any action instituted under this Agreement shall be brought only in the state courts of the State of Delaware.

assistant: Consent To 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: THIS AMENDMENT NO. 6 AND ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT AND ANY DISPUTE, CLAIM OR CONTROVERSY ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AMENDMENT NO. 6 OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT (WHETHER ARISING IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE) SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REGARD TO CONFLICTS OF LAW RULES THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICATION OF A DIFFERENT GOVERNING LAW (OTHER THAN ANY MANDATORY PROVISIONS OF THE UCC RELATING TO THE LAW GOVERNING PERFECTION AND THE EFFECT OF PERFECTION OR PRIORITY OF THE SECURITY INTERESTS) .

assistant: Applicable 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: shipper identifies (or addresses) the merchandise for a particular, ultimate consignee. Then the requisite fixed and persisting intent is manifest at the time of the initial shipment, and the transportation remains interstate or foreign commerce at least until the merchandise is delivered to that identified consignee. Hays Home Delivery, 1994 WL 665958, at *5 n. 6. Such exception appears to derive from and is consistent with the necessary focus on the essential character of the commerce and practical realities, suggesting that the ICC itself did not intended to dispense with a totality assessment in all cases involving two shippers. Accord Swift Textiles, 799 F.2d at 699 (“The nature of a shipment is not determined ... by when and to whom title passes”); Roberts, 844 N.W.2d at 410 (<HOLDING>). Further, contrary to Progressive’s Options: A. holding that direct proof of intent to defraud is unnecessary and that it may be inferred from the act of the parties and from all circumstances B. holding that fraudulent intent as required in the charge of embezzlement can be inferred from the facts proven direct evidence of such intent is not necessary C. holding intent may be inferred from all facts and circumstances D. holding that intent is a separate element and evidence relating to intent is irrelevant to determining whether an object is a criminal instrument E. recognizing that the intent element is to be gleaned from all the surrounding facts and testimony and not solely from the subjective intent of the original shipper

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that the intent element is to be gleaned from all the surrounding facts and testimony and not solely from the subjective intent of the original shipper
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 descriptive headings of this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and do not constitute a substantive part of this Agreement. The parties hereto have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement. If an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties hereto, and no presumption or burden of proof shall arise favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

assistant: Headings
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 will, and will cause each of its Material Subsidiaries to, (a) keep and maintain all Property material to the conduct of its business in good working order and condition, ordinary wear and tear excepted and casualty or condemnation excepted, except if the failure to do so could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, and (b) maintain, with financially sound and reputable insurance companies or through self-insurance, insurance in such amounts and against such risks as are customarily maintained by companies engaged in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you may not copy , modify , distribute , sell , or lease any part of our services or included software , nor may you reverse engineer or attempt to extract the source code of that software , unless laws prohibit those restrictions or you have our written permission .

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: Each of Borrower and Guarantors hereby renews, affirms, and ratifies all security interests and liens created and granted by it to secure the indebtedness, obligations and liabilities of Borrower and Guarantors to Lender. Each of Borrower and Guarantors agrees that this Amendment shall in no manner affect or impair the liens and security interests securing such indebtedness, obligations, and liabilities, and that such liens and security interests shall not in any manner be waived, the purposes of this Amendment begin to modify the Loan Agreement as herein provided, and to carry forward all liens and security interests securing the indebtedness, obligations and liabilities of Borrower and Guarantors to Lender, which security interests and liens are acknowledged by Borrower and Guarantors to be valid and subsisting. Further, Borrower and Guarantors hereby covenant and agree that Lender may, without the signature of Borrower, file UCC Financing Statements in any jurisdiction to perfect any security interest now or hereafter granted to Lender.

assistant: Liens
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: aware of a potential cause of action against Prior until they received Tuttle’s professional analysis in November 2006, so that the complaint — filed in October 2009 — was timely. The claim is unpersuasive. Both the letter from Ms. Eaton’s attorney in November 2004 and the subsequent APA grievance in March 2006 identified nearly all of the claimed deficiencies that formed the basis of the Eatons’ superior court complaint. Tuttle’s letter identified only one distinct additional problem, the absence of a clear “GSA tracing,” but the great bulk of the Eatons’ claims were plainly known or suspected well before the receipt of his analysis. The law does not require absolute certainty for the statute to run. See Bull v. Pinkham Eng’g Assocs., 170 Vt. 450, 456, 752 A.2d 26, 31 (2000) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added). There is no reasonable Options: A. holding that the uscfc did not have jurisdiction over plaintiffs claim because plaintiffs claim of negligence sounds in tort B. holding similar allegations supported that the plaintiffs negligence claim did not accrue until plaintiffs loan payments exceeded his ability to pay C. holding that because plaintiffs iied claim is based on the facts that support plaintiffs malicious prosecution claim plaintiffs iied claim did not accrue until the charges against them were dismissed D. holding that statute did not commence on plaintiffs negligence claim against surveyor until he acquired evidence to suspect that the southern boundary depicted on the survey was inaccurate E. holding that the state courts conclusion that a suspect did not unambiguously request counsel was not unreasonable when during a postmiranda interview the suspect stated i think i would like to talk to a lawyer after which the police stopped questioning him left the room and did not resume questioning until the suspect explicitly said he did not want a lawyer and wanted to continue talking

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that statute did not commence on plaintiffs negligence claim against surveyor until he acquired evidence to suspect that the southern boundary depicted on the survey was inaccurate