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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: AS A SPECIFICALLY BARGAINED FOR INDUCEMENT FOR EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT (AFTER HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSULT WITH COUNSEL), EACH PARTY HERETO EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY LAWSUIT OR PROCEEDING RELATING TO OR ARISING IN ANY WAY FROM THIS AGREEMENT OR THE MATTERS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY .

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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: part of KMD’s culture and that members were expected to retaliate against acts of violence committed on fellow members.” Id. at 1278. Members were expected to live up to their gang nicknames by committing acts of violence. Id. The court held that together this evidence was sufficient to permit the jury to infer that the crime was “committed as an integral aspect of membership in KMD.” Id. at 1277 (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). Similarly, in Wilson, the Fifth Circuit upheld VICAR convictions for members of the Bottoms Boys, a street gang in Shreveport, Louisiana, based on evidence relating to gang customs could reasonably conclude that participation in an inter-gang war was expected of gang members); United States v. Boyd, 792 F.Supp. 1083, 1102 (N.D.Ill.1992) (<HOLDING>). The evidence presented regarding Banks and Options: A. holding that murder committed by minor gang members was not foreseeable result of sale of alcohol to gang members B. holding that experts testimony as to aspects of gang culture relevant to the case including requirements of members obedience silence and staunch defense of other gang members and the punishment meted out to a gang member who violates these requirements went to factual matters outside the experience of the average juror C. holding that an expert in the field of gangs and gang codes of behavior including the requirements of members obedience silence and staunch defense of other gang members and the punishment meted out to a gang member who violates these requirements could testify because these were factual matters outside the experience of the average juror D. holding that the purpose element of vicar was satisfied where the enterprise expected affronts to gang members to be met with a violent response E. holding that the purpose element is satisfied where aversion to violent acts would invite trouble from other gang members

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the purpose element is satisfied where aversion to violent acts would invite trouble from other gang members
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: no allegations other than to incorporate the previous 186 paragraphs of his Amended Complaint. Moreover, Andela does not contest UNO’s Motion with respect to Claim 23. On that basis alone, Andela has failed to state a claim. Furthermore, UNC is considered part of the State of North Carolina. Aune v. Univ. of N. Carolina at Chapel Hill, 120 N.C.App. 430, 437, 462 S.E.2d 678 (N.C.App.1995). The Eleventh Amendment bars suits against a state in federal court absent that state’s consent. Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 101, 104 S.Ct. 900, 79 L.Ed.2d 67 (1984). The State of North Carolina (including its agencies) is not a proper defendant under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985. See Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 64, 109 S.Ct. 2304, 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989) (<HOLDING>); Eubank v. Leslie, 210 Fed.Appx. 837, 844 Options: A. holding state university is not a person under 1983 B. holding state is not a proper defendant under 1985 C. holding that a state university is not a person within the meaning of 1983 and therefore is not subject to suits brought under 1983 D. holding state is not a proper defendant under 1983 E. holding that a state is not a person under 42 usc 1983

assistant: The best answer is D. holding state is not a proper defendant under 1983
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 provided in this Agreement, the Restricted Stock Units awarded pursuant to this Agreement shall vest as follows: twenty percent (20%) at the end of the first, twenty percent (20%) at the end of the second, thirty percent (30%) at the end of the third, and thirty (30%) at the end of the fourth year anniversary of the Grant Date, respectively.

assistant: Vesting
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: increased risk of extinction, 81 Fed. Reg. at 17,401. The definition of “significant” applied by the Service in the final rule on the petition to list the African coelacanth may very well be a reasonable interpretation of the ESA’s statutory language, but it is not the definition set forth in the Final SPR Policy. The Court recognizes that the Service has broad discretion to interpret the SPR language of the ESA. See Defenders of Wildlife, 258 F.3d at 1145. In light of this broad discretion, the majority of Plaintiffs’ arguments against the Service’s SPR interpretation are unavailing. The SPR interpretation set forth in the Final SPR Policy does not violate the plain language of the ESA merely because it fails to define “significant” as synonymous with “important.” See id. at 1141 (<HOLDING>). The Final SPR Policy is not unreasonable Options: A. holding that such statutory language is quite plain and gives general legislative consent for a district to be sued in the courts of texas in the same manner as other defendants B. holding that we must give effect to the plain and ordinary meaning of a statutes language C. recognizing that the esa uses language in a manner in some tensionwith ordinary usage D. recognizing that where the statutory language is not ambiguous the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute must be given effect E. holding that probation orders need not include every possible restriction so long as a reasonable person is put on notice of what conduct will subject him or her to revocation and that ajlthough the conditions should be clearly set out and must mean what they say every detail need not be spelled out and the language should be interpreted in its common ordinary usage

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that the esa uses language in a manner in some tensionwith ordinary usage
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: be said to have reached a consensus that the inhumane treatment of a huge number of persons accused of no crime and held in confinement is a violation of the law of nations.”). But see Sarei, 221 F.Supp.2d at 1162 n. 190 (concluding that “plaintiffs have not demonstrated that prohibitions against cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment (other than torture) and gross violations of human rights constitute established norms of customary international law”); Xuncax, 886 F.Supp. at 186 (finding that “it is evident that the prohibition against [cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment] poses more complex problems of definition than are presented by norms forbidding torture, summary execution, disappearance or arbitrary detention”); Forti v. Suarez-Mason, 694 F.Supp. 707, 711-12 (N.D.Cal.1988) (<HOLDING>). e. War crimes “After the Second World War, Options: A. holding that a case is moot when the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome B. holding claim is not cognizable C. holding that defendants claim for ineffective assistance of counsel due to a conflict of interest was not cognizable on direct appeal D. holding claim is cognizable E. holding that there is no cognizable claim for cruel inhuman and degrading treatment due to the lack of a precise definition

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that there is no cognizable claim for cruel inhuman and degrading treatment due to the lack of a precise definition
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: 5.3 you will not use , copy , adapt , modify , prepare derivative works of , distribute , license , sell , transfer , publicly display , publicly perform , transmit , broadcast or otherwise exploit the airbnb platform or collective content , except to the extent you are the legal owner of certain member content or as expressly permitted in these terms .

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: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchaser agrees to purchase, up to an aggregate of 113,089 of Shares. Upon receiving the Purchaser’s Subscription Amount on the Closing Date and the delivery by the Purchaser of the other items set forth in Section 2.2 deliverable at the Closing, the Company shall deliver the Shares to the Purchaser as determined pursuant to Section 2.2(a).

assistant: Closings
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 Co-Issuers hereby irrevocably submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of any New York State or federal court sitting in the Borough of Manhattan in The City of New York in any action or Proceeding arising out of or relating to the Notes or this Indenture, and the Co-Issuers hereby irrevocably agree that all claims in respect of such action or Proceeding may be heard and determined in such New York State or federal court. The Co-Issuers hereby irrevocably waive, to the fullest extent that they may legally do so, the defense of an inconvenient forum to the maintenance of such action or Proceeding and further waives the right to object, with respect to such Proceeding, that such court does not have any jurisdiction over such party. The Co-Issuers irrevocably consent to the service of any and all process in any action or Proceeding by the mailing or delivery of copies of such process to it at the office of the Co-Issuers’ agent set forth in Section 7.2 . The Co-Issuers agree that a final judgment in any such action or Proceeding shall be conclusive and may be enforced in other jurisdictions by suit on the judgment or in any other manner provided by law.

assistant: Submission 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Brief for Petitioner in No ord’s altered circumstances are immaterial to our resolution of this dispute, and we do not decide any questions that would arise if he were the only defendant. 10 Our analysis of the proper disposition of this case follows from our conclusion that government officials who secure a favorable judgment on immunity grounds may obtain our review of an adverse constitutional holding. See supra, at 708. As just noted, Munsingwear justified vacatur to protect a litigant who had the right to appeal but lost that opportunity due to happenstance. 340 U. S., at 39, 41. We have therefore left lower court decisions intact when mootness did not deprive the appealing party of any review to which he was entitled. See, e. g., U. S. Bancorp Mortgage Co., 513 U. S., at 25 (<HOLDING>); Karcher v. May, 484 U. S. 72, 83 (1987) Options: A. holding that the appealing party had sur rendered his claim to the equitable remedy of vacatur by settling the case and thus voluntarily forfeiting his legal remedy by the ordinary processes of appeal B. holding that the appellant had an adequate remedy by appeal for his discovery violation allegations C. holding that the remedy in a prison conditions case must remedy actual injuries that have been identified by the court and suffered by the plaintiffs D. recognizing constructive trust as appropriate equitable remedy E. holding that the illegality or unconstitutionality of a state or municipal tax or imposition is not of itself a ground for equitable relief in the courts of the united states in such a case the aggrieved party is left to his remedy at law when that remedy is as complete practicable and efficient as the remedy in equity

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the appealing party had sur rendered his claim to the equitable remedy of vacatur by settling the case and thus voluntarily forfeiting his legal remedy by the ordinary processes of 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument. The parties hereto hereby acknowledge and agree that signatures delivered by facsimile or electronic means (including by “pdf”) shall be deemed effective for all purposes.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of the Agreement is rendered or declared illegal or unenforceable by reason of any existing or subsequently enacted legislation or by decree of a court of last resort, the Parties (or to the extent applicable to Section 5.5 , the Parties, CNX, NBL, DevCo I LP, DevCo II LP and DevCo III LP) shall meet promptly and negotiate substitute provisions for those rendered or declared illegal or unenforceable, but all of the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and will not be affected or impaired in any way thereby.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you agree that regardless of any statute or law to the contrary or the applicable dispute resolution process , any claim or cause of action you may have arising out of or related to use of the service or otherwise under these must be filed within one ( 1 ) year after such claim or cause of action arose or you hereby agree to be forever barred from bringing such claim .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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: will also establish a de facto pension plan, whether or not the parties intended to do so”). Still, if the appellant is to succeed, he must show that: (1) there is a plan, fund, or program; (2) “established and maintained by an employer”; (3) with one of the two effects set out in the statute, as quoted above. In other words, the broad statutory definition of a pension plan does not avail the appellant unless he can demonstrate that his employer established or maintained some sort of pension plan. As the statute itself makes clear, however, the plan need not be formalized; the plaintiff can prevail if the existence of a plan can be inferred from the “surrounding circumstances.” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(2)(A); see also, e.g., Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367, 1372 (11th Cir.1982) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). The Dillingham court was one of the first to Options: A. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant B. holding that erisa does not preempt the plaintiffs claim that the erisa plan administrator is liable for medical malpractice where the plaintiff premised the claim solely on state law and did not invoke the erisa plan C. holding abuse of discretion review is appropriate when erisa plan grants discretion to the plan administrator D. holding that even if a thirdparty administrator is not a fiduciary under erisa such an administrator still has standing pursuant to 1331 E. holding that although erisa requires administrator to maintain written instrument establishing plan such instrument is not a prerequisite to coverage under the act

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that although erisa requires administrator to maintain written instrument establishing plan such instrument is not a prerequisite to coverage under the act
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: offerings) and due diligence binders (“DDBs”) (for purported real estate offerings).” This distinction between securities offerings and real estate is máintainéd throughout the Com plaint. (Complaint, ¶¶ 538, 554, 585, and 609). Just because the TIC investments involved real estate does not obviate the possibility that they were structured in such a way that they meet the definition of securities under federal law. Indeed, the Trustee acknowledges having filed lawsuits in other jurisdictions in which this very assertion is made. Whatever the case, the structure and characterization of the TIC investments is not something the Court is prepared to address in the context of a motion to dismiss. Cf., San Francisco Residence Club, Inc. v. Amado, 773 F.Supp.2d 822, 829 (N.D.Cal.2011) (<HOLDING>). The Trustee is correct that alternative Options: A. holding that an investment contract with a fixed return can still be security B. holding as an investment for future development C. holding that whether a tic investment could be characterized as a security was a factbased inquiry D. holding that the costs of computerized research should be characterized not as taxable costs but as attorneys fees E. holding that the trustee could not avoid a security interest under section 549 when that security interest was authorized by the bankruptcy court

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that whether a tic investment could be characterized as a security was a factbased inquiry
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: Such Purchaser has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement. This Agreement, when executed and delivered by the Purchaser, will constitute a valid and legally binding obligation of the Purchaser, enforceable in accordance with its terms, except as limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, fraudulent conveyance, and any other laws of general application affecting enforcement of creditors’ rights generally, and as limited by laws relating to the availability of a specific performance, injunctive relief, or other equitable remedies.

assistant: Authorizations
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 may be executed and delivered (including by electronic transmission) in one or more counterparts, and by the different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered, shall be deemed to be an original but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Electronically transmitted signatures shall be deemed to be, and shall be legally effective as, original signatures for all purposes of this Agreement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Pursuant to its Program Administration Agreement, Gotham has appointed and authorized Program Administrator (or its respective designees) to take such action as agent on its behalf and to exercise such powers under this Agreement as are delegated to Program Administrator by the terms hereof, together with such powers as are reasonably incidental thereto.

assistant: Authorizations
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: if there is a substantial change in the itinerary or the host service needs to be cancelled , airbnb will work with the host to provide guests an alternative date for the host service , an appropriate refund or a rebooking .

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 party hereby irrevocably waives any right it may have, and agrees not to request, a jury trial for the adjudication of any dispute hereunder or in connection herewith or arising out of this Agreement or any transaction contemplated hereby.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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, requests, demands and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given: (a) upon delivery if delivered by hand to the Party to whom said notice or other communication shall have been directed; (b) one (1) business day after delivery to a commercial overnight courier for next business day delivery; or (c) if mailed by certified or registered U.S. mail with postage prepaid, on the third (3rd) business day after the date on which it is so mailed at the address set forth on the signature page hereto or to such other address(es) as may have been furnished to/by Indemnitee to/by Angelus.

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: No failure on the part of the Administrative Agent or any Lender to exercise, and no course of dealing with respect to, and no delay in exercising, any right, power or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof; nor shall any single or partial exercise by the Administrative Agent or any Lender of any right, power or remedy hereunder preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, power or remedy. The remedies herein are cumulative and are not exclusive of any remedies provided by law.

assistant: No Waivers
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 compensation for Executive’s performance of Executive’s duties hereunder, the Company shall pay to Executive a salary at the annual rate of seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) per year (the “ Base Salary ”), payable in equal bi-weekly installments and in accordance with the normal payroll practices of the Company, less required deductions for state and federal withholding tax, social security and all other employment taxes and authorized payroll deductions.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes all prior negotiations, agreements, and understandings, whether written or oral, among the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement; provided , however , that, for the avoidance of doubt, (i) any confidentiality agreement executed by any Consenting Creditor shall survive this Agreement and shall continue to be in full force and effect in accordance with its terms and (ii) the terms of any Definitive Documentation shall control with respect to the subject matter of such Definitive Documentation.

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: 3. In consideration of each and every disclosure of CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION, the Parties agree to: (e) maintain in confidence any information regarding the nature or scope of any transaction between the Parties, except to the extent such information must be disclosed pursuant to law, and then only after notifying the other Party of such requirement.

assistant: Yes
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 obligations of the Borrower under Section 4.1 , Section 4.2 , Section 4.3 , Section 11.3 and Section 11.4 , shall in each case survive any assignment by the Lender and the occurrence of the Termination Date. The representations and warranties made by each Loan Party in each Loan Document shall survive the execution and delivery of such Loan Document until the Termination Date.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to use summary judgment as a vehicle for fragmented adjudication of. non-determinative issues. Subsection (a) of the Rule states that a party “seeking to recover upon a claim, counterclaim, or cross-claim ..., may ... move ... for a summary judgment in the party’s favor upon all or any part thereof.” F.R.C.P. 56(a) (emphasis added). Furthermore, Subsection (c) states that “[a] summary judgment, interlocutory in character, may be rendered on the issue of liability alone although there is a genuine issue as to the amount of damages”, see F.R. Civ. P. 56(c). The clear implication is that the issue of liability is the only non-determinative issue which may be disposed of on summary judgment. See United States v. American Int’l Group, Inc., 1997 WL 66786, *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 14, 1997) (<HOLDING>); see also City of Wichita, Kan. v. U.S. Gypsum Options: A. holding that a ruling on a nondispositive issue would be inappropriate B. holding that on appeal a summary judgment ruling will be upheld if it can be sustained on any grounds even if the trial court gave an incorrect reason for its ruling C. holding that a party must obtain a distinct ruling on an issue in order to raise it on appeal D. holding that the defendants sentence for robbery was not inappropriate 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 A. holding that a ruling on a nondispositive issue would be inappropriate
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Term, Company will reimburse Consultant for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by Consultant in performance of service for Company under this Agreement ( e.g. , transportation, lodging and food expenses incurred while traveling on Company business), all subject to such policies and other requirements as Company may from time to time establish for its Consultants generally.

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: immunity insulates the State and its agencies from liability based on vague or principled notions [of government responsibility].” Id. at 574, 746 S.E.2d at 565. 34 . Respondent urges that J.H. v. West Virginia Div. of Rehabilitation Svcs., 224 W.Va. 147, 680 S.E.2d 392 (2009) stands for the proposition that the special duty doctrine creates a separate cause of action. J.H. involved a patient at a rehab center who was sexually molested by another resident. First, we note that J.H. is a per curiam decision which does, in fact, cite to the special duty doctrine as a basis to reverse the circuit court's 12(b)(6) dismissal of the case. However, it is clear that J.H. is contrary to the well-established and predominant application of the special duty doctrine. See also Lavender, supra (<HOLDING>). The overwhelming bulk of our jurisprudence Options: A. recognizing public policy exception to atwill doctrine B. holding that the public duty doctrine applied to claims against the town and fire chief for negligence in responding to a fire call although plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to show the special duty exception applied C. holding that the special duty doctrine as an exception to the public duty doctrine was a concept distinct from immunity and did not serve to resurrect an otherwise immune claim D. recognizing doctrine E. holding that liability foreclosed because there exists no class in the sense that would justify invoking the special relationship exception to the public duty doctrine

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the special duty doctrine as an exception to the public duty doctrine was a concept distinct from immunity and did not serve to resurrect an otherwise immune 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: THE MORTGAGOR AND THE MORTGAGEE HEREBY WAIVE THEIR RESPECTIVE RIGHTS TO A TRIAL BEFORE A JURY IN CONNECTION WITH ANY DISPUTE, PROCEEDING OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF, OR IN ANY WAY RELATED TO, THE LOAN, THIS MORTGAGE OR ANY OF THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Schedule 4.9 lists all material Intellectual Property Collateral which is registered with a Governmental Authority or is the subject of an application for registration (other than Internet domain names), in each case which is owned by such Grantor in its own name on the Closing Date. Except as set forth in Schedule 4.9 , such Grantor is the owner of the entire right, title and interest in and to all Intellectual Property Collateral which is owned by such Grantor in its own name on the Closing Date which is material to such Grantor’s business (collectively, the “ Owned Intellectual Property ”). To such Grantor’s knowledge, each Grantor has a valid and enforceable right to use all Intellectual Property Collateral which it uses in its business, but does not own which is material to such Grantor’s business (collectively, the “ Licensed Intellectual Property ”), except which failure to have such a right could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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 Loan Party shall have obtained all governmental authorizations and all consents of other Persons, in each case that are necessary or reasonably advisable in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Loan Documents and each of the foregoing shall be in full force and effect and in form and substance satisfactory to the Lenders.

assistant: Consents
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: After giving effect to the Transactions, (a) the aggregate assets (after giving effect to amounts that could reasonably be received by reason of indemnity, offset, insurance or any similar arrangement), at a fair valuation, of the Loan Parties, taken as a whole, are expected to exceed the aggregate Debt of the Loan Parties on a consolidated basis, as the Debt becomes absolute and matures, (b) each of the Loan Parties will not have incurred or intended to incur, and will not believe that it will incur, Debt beyond its ability to pay such Debt (after taking into account the timing and amounts of cash to be received by each of the Loan Parties and the amounts to be payable on or in respect of its liabilities, and giving effect to amounts that could reasonably be received by reason of indemnity, offset, insurance or any similar arrangement) as such Debt becomes absolute and matures and (c) each of the Loan Parties will not have (and will have no reason to believe that it will have thereafter) unreasonably small capital for the conduct of its business.

assistant: Solvency
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 Employee represents and warrants that the execution of this Agreement and subsequent employment with the Company does not and will not conflict with any obligations that the Employee has to any former employers or any other entity. The Employee further represents and warrants that the Employee has not brought to the Company, and will not at any time bring to the Company, any materials, documents or other property of any nature of a former employer.

assistant: Representations
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 prosecutor referred not once but twice to the Supreme Court— both mentioning “automatic review” and that the interrogatory to be completed by the jurors also “goes to the Supreme Court.” We are unwilling to treat lightly the prosecutor’s pointed references to appellate review of this crucial decision. Statements, like those made by the prosecutor here, “can be literally true but quite misleading by failing, for example, to disclose information essential to make what was said not misleading.” Sawyer, 881 F.2d at 1285. As a result, a Caldwell violation may be established where a technically accurate statement describing the state appellate review process nonetheless “misled the jury to minimize its role in the sentencing process.” Driscoll v. Delo, 71 F.3d 701, 713 (8th Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). Given the limited nature of the Delaware Options: A. holding that under the alabama death penalty statute because the judge did not consider the jurys recommendation the statute which forced the jury to sentence the defendant to death whenever aggravating circumstances existed was not unconstitutional B. holding that the fact that a judge had ruled against the defendant is not a basis for finding the judge prejudiced C. holding that a defendant was not entitled to a relief under section 2255 when he asserted that the sentencing judge who was not the trial judge was influenced by the sentence imposed by the trial judge on a codefendant D. holding that private individuals who conspired with judge could be sued even though judge could not E. holding that prosecutor had violated caldwell by emphasizing that the trial judge could disregard the jurys recommendation of death even though no state judge had in fact ever done so

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that prosecutor had violated caldwell by emphasizing that the trial judge could disregard the jurys recommendation of death even though no state judge had in fact ever done so
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: in the Brownlee murder; and (10) Deputy U.S. Marshal Moran’s testimony about Williams’ appearance on Crimestoppers and America’s Most Wanted. Two of these items of evidence were independently corroborated by admissible evidence. First, Johnny Hankins corrobo rated Capote’s testimony concerning the Palmetto Expressway murders, recounting a conversation in which Williams confided that he and Casado killed several individuals on an expressway. Second, Lewis’s testimony concerning Stit’s role as “an enforcer” for Williams was corroborated by Becton, who testified that both he and Stit worked for Williams in Virginia. This independent testimony mitigates the prejudicial effect of the inadmissible Lewis and Capote testimony. Cf. United States v. DeLoach, 654 F.2d 763, 771 (D.C.Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the cumulative effect of the Options: A. holding that the admission of expert testimony was prejudicial where the testimony was pervasive B. holding that admission of hearsay was harmless where strong circumstantial evidence established the same facts C. holding that admission of hearsay testimony was harmless where the jury heard admissible testimony from three other sources to the same effect D. holding harmless the improper admission of a social workers hearsay testimony concerning a childs report of sexual abuse where the credibility of the childs testimony was supported by other witnesses E. holding that admission of prior statement constituted error but was harmless when other admissible evidence established the same fact

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that admission of hearsay testimony was harmless where the jury heard admissible testimony from three other sources to the same effect
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: absences as one occurrence. As applied to Manning, ARIC treated Manning’s excused medical-absences between April 29 and August 28 as one occurrence. Once ARIC has determined that an absence is not excused, then each day the employee is absent counts as one occurrence. As applied to Manning, once ARIC determined Manning was not eligible for STD benefits, Manning had three days to report to work or she would be considered voluntarily terminated under ARIC’s attendance policy. While Manning had been in contact with ARIC, ARIC would not excuse any additional absences unless Manning provided ARIC with (1) objective medical evidence supporting her disability or (2) a work release from an approved health care provider supporting her ability to return to work. On August 41-42 (1st Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>); Hendricks v. Edgewater Steel Co., 898 F.2d Options: A. holding that the employers determination that the employees doctor did not provide a valid certification of disability was permissible the employer could require that employee to return to work under section 510 and that ejven if the employer was mistaken in its evaluation of the employees disability as long as that determination was in good faith and formed the basis of the decision it is permissible under section 510 B. holding that an employer cannot be held liable under the ada if it had no knowledge of the employees alleged disability C. holding that where employer paid benefits under group disability policy to employee under mistaken belief that his condition resulted from illness rather than injury arising out of and in course of employment employees acceptance of such benefits did not bar him from benefits to which he was entitled under workers compensation law and employer was properly allowed credit for payments made under disability policy D. holding that an employer who has determined that the employee had not been under a disability can discipline that employee for subsequent unexcused absences and not violate section 510 E. holding that after the employer determined the employee was not disabled the employer had a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason to terminate the employee for unexcused absences under section 510

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the employers determination that the employees doctor did not provide a valid certification of disability was permissible the employer could require that employee to return to work under section 510 and that ejven if the employer was mistaken in its evaluation of the employees disability as long as that determination was in good faith and formed the basis of the decision it is permissible under section 510
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 if the determination of damages is “mechanical and uneontroversial,” immediate appeal is allowed). In the instant case, the district court entered its sanctions order on March 14, 1996, but did not quantify the amount of the sanctions. On April 19, 1996, the district court entered a judgment granting SLU’s summary judgment motion, thus triggering the 30-day period for filing the notice of appeal on the merits of her case. Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 58. Hill filed her notice of appeal on May 17, 1996, from both the sanctions order and the grant of summary judgment. The district court had not yet reduced the sanctions to a sum certain, however, and thus, we hold that the sanctions order was not yet final. Accord Discon, Inc. v. NYNEX Corp., 4 F.3d 130, 132 (2d Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). On August 27, 1996, the court ordered payment Options: A. holding sanctions order was too general to support award B. holding that trial court erred by imposing sanctions against attorney without notice and hearing but error was cured by attorneys subsequent challenge to sanctions C. holding that while sanctions order did not meet specificity requirement of section 10005 trial courts findings of fact and conclusions of law supplied necessary particulars and thus deficient sanctions order did not constitute reversible error D. holding that under fed r bankrproc 8002a an appeal of a bankrupt court order finding that sanctions are warranted was not premature where the order fixing the amount of sanctions and ordering payment was subsequently entered more than thirty days later E. holding sanctions order not final where the amount of sanctions had not yet been determined

assistant: The best answer is E. holding sanctions order not final where the amount of sanctions had not yet been determined
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: Executive agrees that, during the Term and for one (1) year thereafter, Executive shall not, in any communications with the press or other media or any customer, client or supplier of OUTFRONT or any of OUTFRONT’s affiliated companies, criticize, ridicule or make any statement which disparages or is derogatory of OUTFRONT or any of OUTFRONT’s affiliated companies or any of their respective directors or senior officers or employees. OUTFRONT agrees, during the Term and for one (1) year thereafter, to prevent any senior executive officer or director of OUTFRONT from, in any communications with the press or other media or any customer, client or supplier of OUTFRONT or any of OUTFRONT’s affiliated companies, criticizing, ridiculing or making any statement which disparages or is derogatory of Executive. Neither Executive’s nor OUTFRONT’s obligations under this paragraph shall not apply to any disclosures required by applicable law, regulation or order of any court or governmental agency.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the amount that will be required to pay his probable liability on his existing debts as they become absolute and matured.” DCL § 271(1). Significantly, however, “[o]nly assets with a present salable value are taken into consideration in determining insolvency. Claims that are inchoate, uncertain, and contested have no present value and cannot be considered' an asset of the [transferor],” First Keystone Consultants, Inc. v. Schlesinger Elec. Contractors, Inc., 871 F.Supp.2d 103, 120 (E.D.N.Y.2012) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also, e.g., Morgan Guar. Trust Co. v. Hellenic Lines Ltd., 621 F.Supp. 198, 220 (S.D.N.Y.1985) (“It is the fair saleable value of assets, not their book value, that determines insolvency.”); Ede v. Ede, 193 A.D.2d 940, 598 N.Y.S.2d 90, 92 (3d Dep’t 1993) (<HOLDING>). “To be ‘salable’ an asset must have ‘an Options: A. recognizing that distributees interest to estate property is subject to divestment until estate is closed B. holding that the nature of the taxpayers legal interest in the subject property is determined by reference to state law C. holding that interest subject to a life estate is an interest so inchoate uncertain and contingent in nature as to clearly lack a present fair salable value D. holding that any property in which the taxpayer has any right title or interest is subject to foreclosure proceeding including property in which others claim an interest so long as all persons having liens or claiming any interest in the property are joined as parties to the suit E. holding that a broadcasting license was property of the estate but not subject to a security interest

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that interest subject to a life estate is an interest so inchoate uncertain and contingent in nature as to clearly lack a present fair salable value
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 provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed waived, amended, supplemented or modified by any Party, unless such waiver, amendment, supplement or modification is in writing and signed by the authorized representative of the Party against whom it is sought to enforce such waiver, amendment, supplement or modification.

assistant: Amendments