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: made clear that “[f]or regulation of employees it is not necessary that the act regulated be anything more than an act reasonably deemed by Congress to interfere with the efficiency of the public service.” United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 101, 67 S.Ct. 556, 570, 91 L.Ed. 754 (1947). Later, with the full development of Pickering cases into a discrete area of First Amendment law, the Supreme Court reinforced United Public Workers’s holding. In 1983, the Court ruled that a governmental employer is not required to “tolerate action which he reasonably believe[s] would” cause the harm against which the prophylactic measure is directed. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 154, 103 S.Ct. 1684, 1693, 75 L.Ed.2d 708 (1983); see also Sanjour v. EPA, 984 F.2d 434, 440 (D.C.Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation marks and brackets Options: A. holding that it is not B. holding that dismissal is proper for a derivative cause of action but not for a direct cause of action C. recognizing cause of action D. recognizing the cause of action E. holding that employer is not required to tolerate action which it reasonably believed would cause harm

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that employer is not required to tolerate action which it reasonably believed would cause harm
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 this case do not present such issues. The recording of IP address information and similar routing data, which reveal the existence of connections between communications devices without disclosing the content of the communications, are precisely analogous to the capture of telephone numbers at issue in Smith. That is why the orders here fit comfortably within the language of a statute drafted with the earlier technology in mind. The substitution of electronic methods of communication for telephone calls does not alone create a reasonable expectation of privacy in the identitie s no expectation of privacy in “subscriber information provided to an internet provider,” such as an IP address (internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Guest v. Leis, 255 F.3d 325, 336 (6th Cir. 2001) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Graham, 824 F.3d 421, 432 Options: A. holding that individuals have no expectation of privacy in their license registration or insurance documents and citing outofstate cases that have held that individuals do not have a privacy interest in their registration records B. holding that prisoners do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their cells C. holding that telephone users have no expectation of privacy in dialed telephone numbers because they voluntarily expose such information to the service provider D. holding that computer users do not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in their bulletin board subscriber information because they have conveyed it to another person E. holding that users have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the content of stored email

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that computer users do not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in their bulletin board subscriber information because they have conveyed it to another person
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 questions concerning the construction, validity and interpretation of the Award as described in the Notice of Grant and this Agreement shall be governed by and construed according to the internal law and not the law of conflicts of the State of Iowa and shall be brought only in federal or state court in Iowa.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to Section 5 of this Note, the Borrower shall reimburse the Holder for all reasonable costs and expenses (including reasonable legal fees and disbursements) incurred by the Holder in connection with the collection or attempted collection of the payment of this Note through legal proceedings or otherwise following an Event of Default.

assistant: Costs
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 you cancel your subscription to the unlimited service , or if your subscription to the unlimited service is interrupted ( for example , if you change your payment details ) , you may not be able to re-subscribe for the unlimited service .

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: statutory claim should be preempted, nor have we found any basis for preemption based on our review of the 1964 collective bargaining agreement. The agreement states that the purpose of the section on employee protection is “to afford protective benefits for employees who are displaced or deprived of employment as a result of changes in the operations of the carrier....” The agreement nowhere states that the protections stated in the CBA are exclusive of any protections that might be provided under state law or that employees have agreed to give up any protections to which they are entitled under state law. Indeed, statutes often provide protections for employees beyond those provided in CBAs. See, e.g., Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 86, 94 S.Ct. 1011, 39 L.Ed.2d 147 (1974) (<HOLDING>). The fact that a CBA provides some particular Options: A. holding that the disappearance by merger of a corporate employer which has entered into a collective bargaining agreement with a union does not automatically terminate all rights of the employees covered by the agreement and that in appropriate circumstances present here the successor employer may be required to arbitrate with the union under the agreement B. holding that an employee may sue for breach of a collective bargaining agreement without the union C. holding that an employee does not forfeit his title vii right of action if he first seeks relief under an arbitration clause in his collective bargaining agreement D. holding that petitioners remedy under title vii of the civil rights act was in addition to remedies available under the collective bargaining agreement in force between his employer and his union E. holding that antidiscrimination rights under title vii cannot be waived by a collective bargaining agreement

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that petitioners remedy under title vii of the civil rights act was in addition to remedies available under the collective bargaining agreement in force between his employer and his union
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: any other female subordinate at defendant company. Further, although Parker testified that there was no justification for authorizing a token increase in plaintiff’s pay, he approved an increase for employee Donald Gerding. Mr. Gerding, a white male whose position and experience was comparable to that of the plaintiff, received authorization from Parker for a $1,700.00 per year increase despite Edward Lewis’s statements that Gerding’s major weaknesses included “poor communication, documentation; provides no leadership; poor attitude.” Parker’s conduct, comments, and his demeanor while testifying indicate that his stated reasons for not approving a modest pay increase to the plaintiff in Spring, 1985 were false and therefore pretextual. See Sims v. Cleland, 813 F.2d 790 (6th Cir. 1987) (<HOLDING>). We conclude that his action was a Options: A. holding that an employee may establish that the legitimate reason for an employment decision offered by an employer is pretextual by showing by a preponderance of the evidence either that the discrim inatory reason was the true reason motivating the employers conduct or that the profferred legitimate reason was false B. holding that temporal proximity is insufficient in and of itself to establish that the employers nondiscriminatory reason for discharging an employee was in fact pretextual C. holding that even an incorrect belief that an employees performance is inadequate can be a legitimate reason for an adverse employment action D. recognizing that an employers decision to eliminate a position is a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for terminating a position or employee E. holding that a reason cannot be proved to be a pretext for discrimination unless it is shown both that the reason was false and that discrimination was the real reason

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an employee may establish that the legitimate reason for an employment decision offered by an employer is pretextual by showing by a preponderance of the evidence either that the discrim inatory reason was the true reason motivating the employers conduct or that the profferred legitimate reason was false
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 distributions under the Plan, including any distribution in respect of this Award, are subject to withholding of all applicable taxes, and the delivery of any cash or other benefits under the Plan or this Award is conditioned on satisfaction of the applicable tax withholding obligations. Except as otherwise provided by the Committee, such withholding obligations may be satisfied, at the Participant’s election, (a) through cash payment by the Participant, (b) through the surrender of shares of Common Stock which the Participant already owns, or (c) through the surrender of shares of Common Stock to which the Participant is otherwise entitled under the Plan; provided, however, that (i) the amount withheld in the form of shares of Common Stock under this Paragraph 6 may not exceed the minimum statutory withholding obligation (based on the minimum statutory withholding rates for Federal and state purposes, including, without limitation, payroll taxes) unless otherwise elected by the Participant, (ii) in no event shall the Participant be permitted to elect less than the minimum statutory withholding obligation, and (iii) in no event shall the Participant be permitted to elect to have an amount withheld in the form of shares of Common Stock pursuant to this Paragraph 6 that exceeds the maximum individual tax rate for the employee in applicable jurisdictions.

assistant: 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: This Agreement, together with the Related Documents, constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties as to the matters set forth in this Agreement. No alteration of or amendment to this Agreement shall be effective unless given in writing and signed by the party or parties sought to be charged or bound by the alteration or amendment.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: documents have not been disclosed to anyone outside of the EPA. Id. ¶¶ 48, 52. Defendant has further established that disclosure of the Redacted and Withheld Documents would reveal Defendant’s enforcement practices and strategies, which could in turn allow Plaintiff other regulated entities to avoid detection and interfere with enforcement by providing Plaintiff with advance notice of Defendant’s analytical approach and the weight to be accorded various factors. Id. ¶¶ 43, 44. Plaintiff asserts that the records at issue involve data and calculations or are spreadsheets (“Numerical Information”) used by Defendant in its civil and administrative actions under the CAA, and that the Numerical Information is “purely factual” and may not therefore, be shielded from disclosure under the (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the record indicates that agency Options: A. holding that a document does not become nondeliberative if facts are included in the deliberations B. holding that if facts are in dispute jury is given authority to resolve them C. holding that the district court may adopt facts contained in the psr without further inquiry if the facts have an adequate evidentiary basis and the defendant does not present rebuttal evidence D. holding that jurisdiction exists for determining if disputed facts are material E. holding that a rule 3850 motion based upon new facts or a significant change in the law must be filed within two years of the time such facts become known or such change is announced

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a document does not become nondeliberative if facts are included in the deliberations
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: for eligible items located in the united states and purchased by an international buyer through the global shipping program , you ( as seller ) will simply ship the item to a parcel processing facility located in the united states .

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: If any term or provision of this Agreement is invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other term or provision of this Agreement or invalidate or render unenforceable such term or provision in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: court’s order of June 18,1998. When “the evidence as to waiver is a written instrument, its construction and interpretation may be decided as a question of law.” Id. Because a determination of the waiver issues raised by the State does not depend on facts not presented below, but rests on the interpretation of written instruments and the law, we address the State’s arguments raised for the first time on appeal as a matter of law. Defendant’s Pleas of Guilty and No Contest {13} Although Defendant may have waived objections to defects in the proceedings that occurred up to the point of the guilty and no contest pleas, including any right to a speedy trial, he did not waive his objections to subsequent defects in the proceedings. See State v. Hodge, 118 N.M. 410, 414, 882 P.2d 1, 5 (1994) (<HOLDING>); see also Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, Options: A. holding entry of guilty plea waives challenges to the deprivation of constitutional rights that occurred prior to the entry of the guilty plea emphasis added B. holding that in order to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support a judgment based on a plea of guilty or no contest a defendant must bring forward a full statement of facts including a transcription of the plea proceedings C. holding that a voluntary guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional defects in the proceedings D. recognizing that a voluntary and understanding guilty plea entered without the benefit of a plea bargain waives all nonjurisdictional defects that occurred before the entry of the plea E. holding voluntary plea of guilty or no contest waives objections to prior defects in the proceedings and also operates as a waiver of statutory or constitutional rights emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is E. holding voluntary plea of guilty or no contest waives objections to prior defects in the proceedings and also operates as a waiver of statutory or constitutional rights emphasis added
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The obligations under this Section 20.4 will continue in full force and effect subsequent to and notwithstanding this Agreement’s expiration or termination. A Franchisee Indemnified Party need not seek recovery from any insurer or other third party, or otherwise mitigate its Losses, in order to maintain and recover fully a claim against Hyatt under this Section 20.4. Hyatt agrees that a failure to pursue a recovery or mitigate a Loss will not reduce or alter the amounts that a Franchisee Indemnified Party may recover from Hyatt under this Section 20.4. Hyatt’s obligation to indemnify the Franchisee Indemnified Parties shall not be limited in any way by reason of any insurance that any Franchisee Indemnified Party maintains.

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: not diseases or injuries within the meaning of applicable legislation.’ ” (quoting 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(c))); Thibault v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 520, 522-23 (1993) (recognizing that spina bifida is a developmental disorder for which benefits may not be awarded). 4 . As a matter of course, the Secretary argues that the medical report was transmitted through CAPRI, and he attached to his brief a copy of the July 2005 VA examination report and an image from a computer screen that he argues proves that the report was transmitted in compliance with M21-1MR standards. Secretary’s Br. Appendix (App.) at 1. This document was generated by the Secretary during the pendency of Mr. Johnson’s claim and its validity is not questioned by Mr. Johnson. See MacWhorter v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 133, 136 (1992) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, it is deemed to have been before Options: A. holding that a partys failure to raise an issue in the opening brief waived the issue even though the party raised the issue in his reply brief B. holding that a court may consider a theory raised for the first time in a posttrial brief unless it is precluded by the pleadings or it prejudices the opposing party C. holding that a partys failure to respond to a legally plausible position in an opposing brief allowed the court to assume the point raised by the opposing brief D. holding argument not raised in opening brief but raised for the first time in reply brief was waived E. holding that an argument raised only in fact section of opening brief and in reply brief is not properly raised

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a partys failure to respond to a legally plausible position in an opposing brief allowed the court to assume the point raised by the opposing brief
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 or other communications provided for in this Agreement shall be made, if to the Company, to TRI Pointe Group, Inc., Attn: Chief Financial Officer, 19540 Jamboree Road, Suite 300, Irvine, California 92612, and if to the Holder, to the last known mailing address of the Holder contained in the records of the Company. All notices, requests or other communications provided for in this Agreement shall be made in writing either (a) by personal delivery, (b) by facsimile or electronic mail with confirmation of receipt, (c) by mailing in the United States mails or (d) by express courier service. The notice, request or other communication shall be deemed to be received upon personal delivery, upon confirmation of receipt of facsimile or electronic mail transmission or upon receipt by the party entitled thereto if by United States mail or express courier service; provided , however , that if a notice, request or other communication sent to the Company is not received during regular business hours, it shall be deemed to be received on the next succeeding business day of the Company.

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: The Issuer and the Company hereby irrevocably waive, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any and all right to trial by jury in any legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the transactions 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: Each of the Borrower and its Subsidiaries has timely filed (or joined in filing) all federal income tax returns and all other material tax returns required to have been filed and has paid or caused to be paid all Taxes required to have been paid by it, except Taxes that are being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings and for which reserves in accordance with GAAP have been provided on the books of the Borrower.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Borrower and its Subsidiaries has timely filed or caused to be filed all income, franchise and other material Tax returns and reports required to have been filed and has paid or caused to be paid all income, franchise and other material taxes required to have been paid by it or levied or imposed upon it or its properties, income or assets otherwise due and payable, except Taxes that are being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings diligently conducted and for which the Borrower or such Subsidiary, as applicable, has set aside on its books adequate reserves in accordance with GAAP.

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: by them. Indeed, in the two published opinions relied upon by Marshak, both district judges expressly declined to consider whether Marshak and his assignors had defrauded the PTO when they failed to disclose Treadwell’s superior rights in their trademark application: These arguments miss the mark, however, because they could only accrue, if at all, to Treadwell’s benefit, not to Sheppard’s. Sheppard argues that the rights to “The Drifters” were lodged in the group’s manager, Treadwell, and the corporation he set up to control the group’s assets. In this case, however, when only Marshak’s and Sheppard’s rights are at stake, these arguments are irrelevant. Marshak v. Sheppard, 666 F.Supp. 590, 598-600 (S.D.N.Y.1987); see also Marshak v. Green, 505 F.Supp. 1054, 1060-61 (S.D.N.Y.1981)(<HOLDING>). For these same reasons, this Court rejects Options: A. holding that dock green was estopped from asserting a claim of fraudulent registration because green swore to and signed the application B. holding that tribal entity was not equitably estopped from asserting immunity because misrepresentations of the tribes officials or employees cannot affect its immunity from suit C. holding that a defendant was estopped from asserting improper service where the defendants conduct caused the allegedly improper service D. holding that the insurer was not estopped from asserting a policy defense not contained in its reservation of rights letter where the delay was not unreasonable and the insured was not prejudiced E. holding that the postmark on the registration application was the determining factor when a registration is subsequently approved

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that dock green was estopped from asserting a claim of fraudulent registration because green swore to and signed the application
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 LOC will not be invalidated. Morgan’s motion for summary judgment on this claim is granted, and KLI’s illegality claim is dismissed. D. Plaintiffs’ Gambling Claim Plaintiffs’ sixth cause of action alleges that the transactions at issue were “bets” in violation of the New York Anti-Gambling Statute. See N.Y. G.O.L. § 5-401. Although I have characterized KLI’s swap agreements as “bets” and “speculations” on currency fluctuations, the transactions were in the form of forward contracts, swaps and derivatives. Derivatives transactions, forward contracts and swap agreements in currencies and commodities are not considered illegal gambles, and do not violate New York’s gambling statute. See General Elec. Co. v. Metals Res. Group, 293 A.D.2d 417, 741 N.Y.S.2d 218, 219 (1st Dep’t 2002) (<HOLDING>). As such, summary judgment is granted to Options: A. holding that a commodities swap agreement is not an illegal contract to gamble and is exempt from the strictures of 5401 B. holding if the plea agreement was not conditioned on the sentencing guidelines an appellant is not entitled to relief because his sentence is not illegal C. holding that an arbitration agreement is separable from the underlying agreement D. holding that an addition to an abated property is not exempt E. holding that no action may be maintained on an illegal agreement

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a commodities swap agreement is not an illegal contract to gamble and is exempt from the strictures of 5401
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 you die without having fully exercised the Option, then any Shares Granted under the Option that are not yet vested (but which have not lapsed or been forfeited) at that time shall thereupon become fully vested and (a) the Option may be exercised, subject to the UK Sub-Plan, by your personal representative(s) for the full number of Shares Granted (less any shares for which the Option was previously exercised), but (b), such person's right to exercise the Option shall terminate not later than one (1) year after the date of your death.

assistant: Death
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: 342 N.C. 374, 380, 464 S.E.2d 268, 271 (1995)). “[S]uch construction is ‘strongly persuasive’ and . . . entitled to ‘due consideration.’ ” See id., 349 N.C. at 302, 507 S.E.2d at 293 (quoting Shealy v. Associated Transp., Inc., 252 N.C. 738, 742, 114 S.E.2d 702, 705 (1960)). Indeed, under operation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 105-264 (2003), the Secretary’s interpretation of a statute he administers is “prima facie correct.” The taxpayers assert N.C. Admin. Code tit. 17, r. 5C.0102(a) “is of no consequence” because amendments to the income tax statute occurring in 2001 (the “2001 amendments”) indicates “that the agency’s rule [improperly] expanded the income tax statute” instead of interpreting it. See Duke Power Co. v. Clayton, Comr. of Revenue, 274 N.C. 505, 511, 164 S.E.2d 289, 294 (1968) (<HOLDING>). The taxpayers argue the only possible purpose Options: A. holding that we review a district courts interpretation of a statute de novo B. holding that an intervening change in statutory interpretation did not amount to a change in controlling law under the mandate rule where plaintiffs attempted on remand to rely on a different but related statute which could have been but was not previously raised and the interpretation of which had not changed C. holding an administrative interpretation cannot change the meaning of a statute or control the courts interpretation of it D. holding erisa plan interpretation is simply one of contract interpretation E. holding that bias interpretation of immigration law is entitled to deference except where the interpretation is clearly contrary to the plain and sensible meaning of the statute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding an administrative interpretation cannot change the meaning of a statute or control the courts interpretation of it
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: until it was validly terminated in January 1991. At the time the contract was terminated, Mr. McClure was no longer on the county commission. His replacement on the commission voted not to terminate the contract, whereas Mr. Spencer and Mr. Heiser again voted in favor of termination. Mr. Umbehr subsequently entered into separate contracts to haul trash with five of the six cities he had previously served. The county did not enter into any other contracts involving trash hauling. Mr. Umbehr brought suit against Defendants, claiming that they caused the termination of his contract with the county in retaliation for his outspoken criticism of the county and the county commission, thereby violating his First Amendment right of free speech. He s Gary, 759 F.Supp. 461, 464 (N.D.Ind.1990) (<HOLDING>); MEDCARE HMO v. Bradley, 788 F.Supp. 1460, Options: A. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract because of lobbying and other political activities not protected by first amendment B. holding that independent contractor claiming removal from city towing rotation list because of political affiliation was not protected by first amendment C. holding that first amendment prohibits government officials from discharging or threatening to discharge lowerlevel public employees based on their political affiliation D. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract because of political affiliation not protected by first amendment E. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract in retaliation for petition was not protected by first amendment

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that independent contractor claiming termination of contract because of political affiliation not protected by first amendment
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 Participant hereby explicitly and unambiguously consents to the collection, use and transfer, in electronic or other form, of the Participant’s personal data as described in this Agreement and any other Restricted Stock grant materials by and among, as applicable, the Participant’s employer or contracting party (the “ Employer ”) and the Company for the exclusive purpose of implementing, administering and managing the Participant’s participation in the Plan. The Participant understands that the Company may hold certain personal information about the Participant, including, but not limited to, the Participant’s name, home address and telephone number, work location and phone number, date of birth, social insurance number or other identification number, salary, nationality, job title, hire date, any shares of stock or directorships held in the Company, details of all awards or any other entitlement to shares awarded, cancelled, exercised, vested, unvested or outstanding in the Participant’s favor, for the purpose of implementing, administering and managing the Plan (“ Personal Data ”).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a violation .of a procedural right. In other words, one should not be distracted by minnows when the aim of the statute is trout. Here, the Yeagers allege a notice delay of 13 days and nothing more. There, is no evidence that the delay has in any way undermined the FDCPA’s goal of providing a consumer with notice of, and an opportunity to challenge, a creditor’s debt information. Surely, the Spokeo commonsense principle dictates that this delay, unaccompanied, by any harm or material risk of harm, does not “entail a degree of risk sufficient to meet' the concreteness requirement.” Id. What the Yeagers have is a minnow; the trout are still .out there. The Yeagers, therefore, lack standing to bring this lawsuit. Cf. Nicklaw v. Citimortgage, Inc., 839 F.3d 998, 1001 (11th Cir. 2016) (<HOLDING>); Dutta v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. Options: A. holding that the note and the mortgage must coexist to give the mortgage validity B. holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage C. holding that a mortgage or modification of a mortgage is not a good or a service under the dtpa D. holding that because there was no evidence of harm or material risk of harm the plaintiff lacked standing to bring a suit for statutory damages based on the defendants belated recordation of a certificate of discharge of the plaintiffs mortgage which a new york statute required to be recorded within 30 days after satisfaction of the mortgage E. holding court could consider a mortgage agreement not attached to the complaint in ruling on motion to dismiss because the complaint refers to the mortgage numerous times the mortgage is attached to this motion and is central to plaintiffs claims

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that because there was no evidence of harm or material risk of harm the plaintiff lacked standing to bring a suit for statutory damages based on the defendants belated recordation of a certificate of discharge of the plaintiffs mortgage which a new york statute required to be recorded within 30 days after satisfaction of the mortgage
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: was void. Because the Johnstons moved for a summary judgment on this issue, they must prove that they are entitled to prevail as a matter of law. See Johnson, 891 S.W.2d at 644. The record indicates that the IRS gave notice beginning on March 21, 1995 that a sealed bid sale was scheduled for April 11, 1995 in Houston, Texas. The sale was then postponed on April 11. Appellants received a second notice of sale on November 22, 1995. The property was sold to the Bennetts at the sealed bid sale on December 12, 1995 in Houston, and the Bennetts received a certificate of sale. After the 180-day redemption period had expired, a quitclaim deed was issued to Mary Bennett on June 11, 1996, which deed she recorded the next day. The procedures for seizure of land mandated by section 6 r.1973) (<HOLDING>); Koby v. United States, 47 Fed. Cl. 99, 105 Options: A. holding that a decedents tax settlement with the irs did not establish the value of his estates claim against the irs as a matter of law B. holding that although irs failed to comply with procedures of section 6335 tax sale was valid due to ratification by taxpayer C. holding that failure of irs agent to follow irs electronic surveillance regulations before recording conversations between taxpayer and agent did not require suppression of tape recordings in prosecution of taxpayer accused of bribing irs agent since irs was not required by constitution to adopt its regulations governing electronic surveillance violation of agency regulations did not raise constitutional questions D. holding that a notice of tax deficiency sent to a taxpayer by the irs need not be signed in order to be valid E. holding that irss failure to comply with seizure and sale provisions of section 6335 renders tax sales voidable at taxpayers option rather than void as matter of law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that although irs failed to comply with procedures of section 6335 tax sale was valid due to ratification by taxpayer
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: not include those UAs that did not produce a sample. Either , way, the record demonstrates that Casey's participation in the random UA testing program was minimal. 17 . See G.C., 67 P.3d at 651. 18 . AS 47.10.088(a)(2); Sherman B. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children's Servs., 290 P.3d 421, 431 (Alaska 2012). 19 . AS 47.10.088(b). 20 . Sherry R. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Div. of Family & Youth Servs., 74 P.3d 896, 903 (Alaska 2003). 21 . We also note that the treatment assessor's initial assessment of Casey was based exclusively on information which Casey provided. Thus, to the extent the provider erroneously concluded that Casey did not need treatment, this error was presumably caused Office of Children's Servs., 212 P.3d 756, 765 (Alaska 2009) (<HOLDING>). 32 . Casey notes that OCS "only obtained one Options: A. holding that the juvenile court could have concluded that dhr had made reasonable efforts to reunite the father with the child B. holding that dhr properly ended reunification efforts after eight months when previous reunification efforts had failed and the record indicated that further efforts would be unavailing C. holding the evidence was sufficient to support termination under subsection n when after release from prison the defendant was advised of visitation but only visited with his children twice and made no further efforts to be involved with them and a case worker testified that all reasonable efforts were made to return the children to the parents D. holding that even under the higher active efforts burden required in indian child welfare act icwa cases the fact that ocs failed to make efforts during three of the 26 months it was involved in the case was not determinative E. holding that ocs made active efforts as required by icwa even where ocss efforts temporarily declined when father was incarcerated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that ocs made active efforts as required by icwa even where ocss efforts temporarily declined when father was incarcerated
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 other assets primarily used by Seller in the conduct of the Business and to be included in the Purchased Assets set forth on Schedule 1.1(m) and all other assets and all rights, claims, causes of action, judgments and warranties (express or implied) in favor of Seller and/or Property Sellers that relate to any of the Purchased Assets or otherwise are used in connection with the operation of the Business or the Real Property and that are not otherwise listed in this Section 1.1 , subject to rights, if any, of Circle K thereto under the Circle K Purchase Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: voluntarily assumed an obligation to act for Motorcity’s benefit. The claim that Southeast breached a fiduciary duty to notify Motorcity about the out-of-trust sales necessarily depends upon the existence of a fiduciary relationship. See Barnett Bank of West Florida v. Hooper, 498 So.2d 923, 925 (Fla.1986) (“The usual relationship between a bank and its depositor is one of debtor to creditor ... not ordinarily imposing a duty of disclosure ... [but where the bank] has established a relationship of trust and confidence ... the bank may be found to have assumed a duty to disclose facts.”). Under Florida law, it is clear that a lender does not ordinarily owe fiduciary duties to its borrower. See, e.g., Keyes Jeep Eagle, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp., 897 F.Supp. 1437, 1443 (S.D.Fla.1995) (<HOLDING>); Metcalf v. Leedy, Wheeler & Co., 140 Fla. Options: A. holding that under florida law a floor plan financing agreement does not create fiduciary duties B. holding a fiduciary is under a duty to communicate material facts to a plan beneficiary C. holding that professionals who advised the plan were not fiduciaries because they had no decision making authority over the plan or plan assets also noting that the power to act for the plan is essential to status as a fiduciary D. recognizing that plan participants should be able to access information about the plan administrators fiduciary duties from the plan administrators counsel E. holding new york could lawfully modify a florida custody decree because florida court had right under florida law to change the decree

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that under florida law a floor plan financing agreement does not create fiduciary duties
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: 386 U.S. 267 87 S.Ct. 1015 18 L.Ed.2d 37 Kenneth Reynolds WHEATONv.CALIFORNIA. No. 46. Supreme Court of the United States March 13, 1967 Byron J. Walters, for petitioner. Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen. of California, William E. James, Asst. Atty. Gen., and C. Anthony Collins, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case remanded for further consideration in the light of Chapman v. State of California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824. 2 Mr. Justice STEWART would grant certiorari and reverse the judgment for the reasons stated in his opinion concurring in the result in Chapman v. State of California, 386 U.S., at 42, 87 S.Ct., at 837.

assistant: 1
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 (including Exhibits) constitutes and contains the entire agreement and final understanding concerning Executive’s employment with the Company and the other subject matters addressed herein between the parties. It is intended by the parties as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of their agreement. It supersedes and replaces all prior negotiations and all agreements proposed or otherwise, whether written or oral, concerning the subject matter hereof. Any representation, promise or agreement not specifically included in this Agreement shall not be binding upon or enforceable against either party. This is a fully integrated agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: personally waive the rights to testify at trial, to have the prosecution witnesses testify in defend other settings. One such case arose when a defendant charged with first-degree criminal sexual conduct stipulated to the element that he was more than 36 months older than the victim without waiving his right to a jury trial on that element. State v. Wright, 679 N.W.2d 186, 190 (Minn.App.2004), review denied (Minn. June 29, 2004). In Wright, we applied a harmless-error analysis to the district court’s failure to obtain appellant’s personal waiver. Id. at 191. In part, we reasoned that proving the age element to the jury would have had “a more prejudicial effect than- the stipulation” because appellant was significantly older than the victim. Id.; see also Hinton, 702 N.W.2d at 281-82 (<HOLDING>). Also, both Wright and Hinton involved Options: A. holding that stipulation of the appellants undisputed prior convictions was harmless error and reasoning that blakely v washington which does not require a jury determination of prior convictions provides implicit support for the conclusion that a harmless error analysis is appropriate B. recognizing that where the error involved defies analysis by harmless error standards or the data is insufficient to conduct a meaningful harmless error analysis then the error will not be proven harmless beyond a reasonable doubt C. holding blakely errors are subject to harmless error analysis D. holding that the trial courts error in not allowing defendant to testify on direct examination as to nature and circumstances of prior convictions was not harmless error where credibility of the defendant was critical to the deliberations of the jury E. holding that any error was harmless and thus not plain error

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that stipulation of the appellants undisputed prior convictions was harmless error and reasoning that blakely v washington which does not require a jury determination of prior convictions provides implicit support for the conclusion that a harmless error analysis is appropriate