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: on the right is nonetheless subject to review 'under a "reasonable exercise of police power" test. 874 P.2d at 329. {19 In the second mstance, we would note: ~ ' e Not all restrictions on fundamental rights are analyzed unider a strict seru-tiny standard of review. See, e.g., Heller v. District of Columbia, 670 F.3d 1244, 1256 (D.C.Cir.2011) ("The [Supreme] Court has not said, however, and it does not logically follow, that strict scrutiny is called for whenever a fundamental right is at stake."); State v. Cole, 264 Wis.2d 520, 665 N.W.2d 328, 336 (2008) ("This court has previously recognized that it need not apply strict serutiny every time a governmental burden upon fundamental rights is implicated."); see also Denver Publ'g Co. v. City of Awrora, 896 P.2d 306, 311 (Colo.1995) (<HOLDING>); Watso v. Colo. Dep't of Social Servs., 841 Options: A. holding that procedural errors at sentencing are routinely subject to harmlessness review quoting puckett v united states 556 us 129 141 129 sct 1423 173 led2d 266 2009 B. holding that regulations that are unrelated to the content of speech are subject to an intermediate level of scrutiny quoting turner broad sys inc v fed commcn commn 512 us 622 642 114 sct 2445 129 led2d 497 1994 plurality opinion C. holding that the rule announced in simmons v south carolina 512 us 154 114 sct 2187 129 led2d 133 1994 doesnt apply retroactively on collateral review D. holding that although contempt and sanctions are not identical the principles the supreme court articulated for cases of contempt in international union united mine workers of america v bagwell 512 us 821 114 sct 2552 129 led2d 642 1994 guide our determination of what procedural protections are necessary in imposing sanctions under a courts inherent powers E. recognizing that references to and descriptions of the jurys verdict as advisory as a recommendation and of the judge as the final sentencing authority are permissible under romano v oklahoma 512 us 1 114 sct 2004 129 led2d 1 1994

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that regulations that are unrelated to the content of speech are subject to an intermediate level of scrutiny quoting turner broad sys inc v fed commcn commn 512 us 622 642 114 sct 2445 129 led2d 497 1994 plurality opinion
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: request with a viable constitutional claim that is not procedurally barred, or (b) when the sought-after assistance would only support a meritless claim, or (c) when the sought after assistance would only supplement prior evidence. Id. (internal citation omitted; emphasis added). Gutierrez has not shown the district court abused its discretion in failing to grant additional investigative assistance. “[Gutierrez’] right under 21 U.S.C. § 848(q)(9) to the assistance of experts where reasonably necessary to press his habeas claims does not entitle him to a federal evidentiary hearing when he has failed to ... develop his evidence in state court”. Turner v. Johnson, 106 F.3d 1178, 1184 n. 16 (5th Cir.1997) (internal citations omitted); see also Riley v. Dretke, 362 F.3d 302 (5th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1056, 125 S.Ct. 866, Options: A. holding petitioner cannot show a substantial need for investigative assistance when the claims he seeks to pursue are procedurally barred B. recognizing that ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claims not premised on procedurally barred claims can be raised for the first time on appeal by new appellate counsel and are not limited to habeas review C. holding that claims raised on direct appeal are procedurally barred from consideration in a rule 3850 motion D. holding petitioner cannot claim he was denied right to assistance of counsel when he knowingly and voluntarily decided to represent himself E. holding that successive motions for postconviction relief are procedurally barred

assistant: The best answer is A. holding petitioner cannot show a substantial need for investigative assistance when the claims he seeks to pursue are procedurally barred
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid or otherwise unenforceable, in whole or in part, the remainder of the provisions or enforceable parts hereof, shall not be affected 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Hor v. Gonzales, 421 F.3d 497, 501-02 (7th Cir.2005). An applicant seeking withholding of removal “bears the burden of demonstrating that loss of life or freedom is more likely than not” if she returned to her home country, Kobugabe, 440 F.3d at 901, but an applicant’s credible testimony can sustain this burden of proof without corroboration, 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b). On the other hand, an IJ may find an applicant’s testimony incredible if she “fails to present certain foundational evidence.” Balogun v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 492, 502 (7th Cir.2004). While these two concepts can become easily conflated, they are distinct. Essentially, an IJ may disbelieve an applicant because she fails to provide corroborating evidence, and subsequently deny her claim. See id.; Zaid 630 (7th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). Though the IJ may have implicitly found that Options: A. holding that where the ij finds the petitioner to be credible his testimony must be accepted B. holding an ij must to address a petitioners explanation for inconsistencies to rely upon them as the basis for an adverse credibility finding C. holding that an ij failed to make explicit credibility finding when he made passing remark that he disbelieved applicants testimony D. holding substantial evidence supported the denial of cat relief where the petitioners cat claim was based on the same testimony the ij found not credible and the petitioner pointed to no other evidence that the ij should have considered E. holding that an ij made an explicit credibility when the ij found testimony not credible based on several enumerated inconsistencies

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an ij made an explicit credibility when the ij found testimony not credible based on several enumerated inconsistencies
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: motion for new trial. First, Glover did not seek to obtain a juror interview pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.431(h), but instead simply sought a new trial based upon its allegation of juror miscon duct. A party generally must establish juror misconduct through a juror interview before being entitled to receive a new trial. See Baptist Hosp. of Miami, Inc. v. Maler, 579 So.2d 97, 100 n. 1 (Fla.1991). Second, without a transcript of the hearing below or a stipulation of relevant facts, it cannot be determined whether the trial court was presented with this claim of misconduct. Also, no evidence was presented to demonstrate that the jury foreman was the same person as the person named in the foreclosure suit. See Beyel Bros., Inc. v. Lemenze, 720 So.2d 556 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(<HOLDING>). Glover’s final claim is that the trial court Options: A. holding that though judge did not question juror individually note from juror to judge requesting private meeting to ask legal question did not suggest juror would not base verdict on evidence B. holding that a court must allow the defendant to ask in voir dire whether a potential juror would automatically impose the death penalty and suggesting that such a juror should be disqualified for cause C. holding that where a nonblack juror with no prior jury experience was empaneled the proffered reason for striking a black juror for lack of jury experience was not genuine and therefore was pretextual D. holding that the court has a duty to resolve the issue of prejudice arising out of jury misconduct even though the defense could have requested a voir dire examination of the juror in its motion to disqualify E. holding that trial courts denial of motion for new trial based on juror misconduct was justified where there was no evidence presented at hearing on motion that juror had knowingly concealed relevant litigation experience during voir dire and identity of juror as county court litigant was not demonstrated

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that trial courts denial of motion for new trial based on juror misconduct was justified where there was no evidence presented at hearing on motion that juror had knowingly concealed relevant litigation experience during voir dire and identity of juror as county court litigant was not demonstrated
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: intend to preclude a franchise tax upon other, unmentioned corporate entities. Unless otherwise provided by law, a franchise tax is imposed upon all domestic and foreign corporations doing business in Texas. See Tex.Tax.-Gen.Ann. arts. 12.01 to 12.22 (Vernon 1969 & Supp.1978-1979). The granting of the privilege to transact business in this state confers economic benefits, including the opportunity to realize gross income and the right to invoke the protection of local law. The Texas franchise tax is a tax on the value of this privilege. General Dynamics Corp. v. Bullock, 547 S.W.2d 255, 257-58 (Tex.1976); Texaco, Inc. v. Calvert, 526 S.W.2d 630, 633 (Tex.Civ.App.—Austin 1975, writ ref’d n.r. e.); see Ford Motor Co. v. Beauchamp, 308 U.S. 331, 334-35, 60 S.Ct. 273, 84 L.Ed. 304 (1939) (<HOLDING>). The formula employed to compute a Options: A. holding that litigating franchise dispute in michigan does not require that michigan law govern dispute as michigan franchise investment law does not expressly void choice of law provisions in franchise agreement B. recognizing this texas rule C. holding that where the entity was incorporated in texas and the shareholders reside in texas and the bankruptcy case is pending in texas texas law not arizona law should be applied D. holding texas franchise tax constitutional E. holding texas poll tax unconstitutional

assistant: The best answer is D. holding texas franchise tax constitutional
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: also , decompiling , reverse engineering , disassembling , or otherwise reducing the code used in any software on this service into a readable form in order to examine the construction of such software and/or to copy or create other products based ( in whole or in part ) on such software , is prohibited .

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: All documents and other tangible objects containing or representing Confidential Information which have been disclosed by either party to the other party, and all copies thereof which are in the possession of the other party, shall be and remain the property of the disclosing party and shall be promptly returned to the disclosing party upon the disclosing party's written request. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to grant any rights to either party under any patent, mask work right or copyright of the other party, nor shall this Agreement grant any party any rights in or to the Confidential Information of the other party except as expressly set forth herein.

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: (a) Each borrowing by the Borrowers from the Lenders hereunder, each payment by the Borrowers on account of any commitment fee and any reduction of the Commitments of the Lenders shall be made pro rata according to the respective Tranche A Term Loan Percentages, Incremental Term Loan Percentages or Revolving Credit Percentages, as the case may be, of the relevant Lenders.

assistant: Payments
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: through inspections, and that the United States does not have jurisdiction to enforce Oil Record Book violations occurring outside the navigable waters of the United States under MARPOL. Any violations of MARPOL, including a violation of Oil Book requirements, must be responded to by way of the referral system outlined above. The government contends first that the Defendant is not charged with a violation of APPS/MARPOL, but rather of domestic law, 18 U.S.C. § 1001. The protocol outlined in MARPOL/APPS addresses a framework for international maritime law, but the government states that this does not — and cannot— limit the United States’ jurisdiction for crimes committed in internal waters and ports. See, e.g., Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410, 416, 99 S.Ct. 1182, 59 L.Ed.2d 416 (1979) (<HOLDING>); Wilson v. Girard, 354 U.S. 524, 529, 77 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that it suffices that a prior conviction was in fact for an offense committed by the defendant against a spouse or other domestic victim B. holding that domestic jurisdiction is absolute for crimes committed within borders of a country C. holding that for purposes of claim 4 another country means a country other than the first and second country explicitly rejecting tpllcs proposed construction D. holding that the state department country report constituted substantial evidence to support the agencys finding of changed country conditions in guatemala E. holding that indian tribes lack tribal jurisdiction over crimes committed by nonmember indians within the tribes reservation

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that domestic jurisdiction is absolute for crimes committed within borders of a country
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 Assignor hereby sells and assigns to the Assignee, and the Assignee hereby purchases and assumes from the Assignor, an interest in and to the Assignor’s rights and obligations under the Loan Agreement such that after giving effect to such assignment, the Assignee shall have purchased pursuant to this Assignment Agreement the percentage interest specified in Item 3 of Schedule 1 of all outstanding rights and obligations under the Loan Agreement and the other Loan Documents. The Commitment purchased by the Assignee hereunder is set forth in Item 4 of Schedule 1.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the extent any provision of this Agreement is prohibited by or invalid under the applicable law of any jurisdiction, such provision shall be ineffective only to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity and only in such jurisdiction, without prohibiting or invalidating such provision in any other jurisdiction or the remaining provisions of this Agreement in any jurisdiction. Without limiting the foregoing provisions of this Section 11.11 , if and to the extent that the enforceability of any provisions in this Agreement relating to Defaulting Lenders shall be limited by Debtor Relief Laws, as determined in good faith by the Administrative Agent or the Fronting Lenders, as applicable, then such provisions shall be deemed to be in effect only to the extent not so limited.

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: a number of integers must be factored into the calculus— e.g., the nature of the information, the nature and characteristics of the supposed criminal activity, the nature and characteristics of the place to be searched, the nature of the items delineated in the warrant — and the likely endurance of the information must be gauged on that basis. See id.; see also United States v. Moscatiello, 771 F.2d 589, 597 (1st Cir.1985), vacated on other grounds, 476 U.S. 1138, 106 S.Ct. 2241, 90 L.Ed.2d 688 (1986). The longer the expected duration of the criminal activity and the longer the expected life of the items attendant to it, the more likely that a datum from the seemingly distant past will be relevant to a current investigation. In this case, all signs point to ongoing an 10th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). Then, too, the troopers proposed to search Options: A. holding to like effect regarding laboratory equipment for the production of methamphetamine B. holding that summary disposition was improper as there were factual issues regarding the scope and effect of a release C. holding that settlement agreements like consent judgments are not given preclusive effect unless the parties manifest their intent to give them such effect D. holding to like effect with respect to a standcommitted fine E. holding to the same effect

assistant: The best answer is A. holding to like effect regarding laboratory equipment for the production of methamphetamine
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 he was “aware of the fact” that Decker’s name was added to an account of Helbling for “convenience only.” Appellant’s Appendix at 33. Despite a general statement that his affidavit was “made on personal knowledge,” there is no showing that he had personal knowledge of the circumstances of the creation of the joint accounts. Id. at 32. Personal knowledge cannot be inferred from the statement, nor is there any showing that Cornell would be competent to testify on the matter. Because affidavits in support of summary judgment must be made on personal knowledge, it is not enough for Cornell to assert that he was “aware of’ alleged facts. Accordingly, Cornell’s affidavit does not satisfy the burden of the Siblings and the Estate in this proceeding. See, e.g., Miller, 701 N.E.2d at 286 (<HOLDING>); Celina, 438 N.E.2d at 1011 (holding that the Options: A. holding that the party moving for summary judgment waived its argument that the opposing partys affidavit should not be considered because the moving party never objected to the timeliness of the affidavit to the trial court B. holding that it was an abuse of discretion for the district court at the summary judgment stage to consider information from an affidavit based on inadmissible hearsay rather than the affiants personal knowledge C. holding that the failure of an affidavit to be made on personal knowledge or specify how the affiant had personal knowledge of the facts asserted is a defect in substance and need not be objected to at trial to be a ground for reversal D. holding that the affidavit in question did not satisfy the burden of the party moving for summary judgment where affiants eonclusory statement failed to indicate personal knowledge of the circumstances in question and personal knowledge could not be reasonably inferred from the contents of the affidavit E. holding that district court properly ignored attorneys affidavit because he did not assert personal knowledge of the transaction

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the affidavit in question did not satisfy the burden of the party moving for summary judgment where affiants eonclusory statement failed to indicate personal knowledge of the circumstances in question and personal knowledge could not be reasonably inferred from the contents of the affidavit
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: Guarantor represents, warrants to and agrees with Lender as to each of the matters set forth below: (a) Guarantor has the power and authority and has full legal rights to enter into this Guaranty and each of the other Loan Documents to which it is a party, and to perform, observe and comply with all of its agreements and obligations under each of such documents; (b) the execution and delivery by Guarantor of this Guaranty and each of the other Loan Documents to which Guarantor is or will be a party, and the performance by Guarantor of all of Guarantor's obligations hereunder and thereunder will not violate or be in conflict with any term or provision of (i) any law, rule statute, ordinance, regulation, code, (ii) any judgments, orders, writs, injunction, or decrees or (iii) any mortgages, indentures, leases, licenses, agreements, understandings, instruments, contracts, proposed transactions or other obligation of Guarantor or to which Guarantor is a party or by which Guarantor, or any material part of Guarantor's assets and properties, may be bound or subject, and will not result in the creation or imposition of any Lien upon any of Guarantor's assets or properties; (c) Guarantor shall not take any action or inaction that may impair any material part of Guarantor's assets and properties; (d) no licenses, permits, franchises, approvals, consents, waivers, notices, authorizations, qualifications, concessions, or the like, or registration, declaration or filing are required (1) in connection with the due and valid execution, delivery and performance by Guarantor of this Guaranty or any other Loan Document to which Guarantor is or will be a party, or (2) to effect the legality, validity, binding effect or enforceability of this Guaranty; (e) this Guaranty is the legal, valid and binding obligation of Guarantor, enforceable against Guarantor in accordance with its terms and provisions; and (f) Guarantor is solvent (i.e., the aggregate fair value of Guarantor's assets exceeds the sum of Guarantor's actual and contingent liabilities) and, both before and after taking into account the Guarantor Obligations, Guarantor has adequate capital and is able to pay his debts as they mature.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Jose de Jesus Serrano appeals from the district court’s judgment and 57-month sentence imposed following a guilty-plea conviction for one count of conspiracy to possess with inten d.2d 261 (2006); United States v. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, 441 F.3d 767, 773 (9th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). AFFIRMED. ** This disposition is not Options: A. holding that term of supervised release was not automatically terminated when defendant was deported from united states and thus defendants subsequent commission of another offense illegal reentry after deportation prior to expiration of term of supervised release violated condition of supervised release that defendant commit no new offenses B. holding that imposing supervised release condition that defendant report to his probation officer upon reentry into the united states is not plain error C. holding that invitederror doctrine precludes defendant from challenging sentence of supervised release where defendant requested sentence of supervised release D. holding that further supervised release may be ordered as a sentence for violation of supervised release E. holding that a condition of supervised release that requires a defendant to report to his probation officer upon reentry to the united states does not violate the defendants fifth amendment right against selfincrimination

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that imposing supervised release condition that defendant report to his probation officer upon reentry into the united states is not plain error
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: Douglas burden-shifting framework. Morgan v. Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp., 328 F.3d 647, 650-51 (D.C.Cir.2003). The defendant asserts that the plaintiff has not established a prima facie case of failure to promote. Def.’s Mot. at 7. The plaintiff contends that he has met all four elements of establishing a prima facie case because (1) he is a Nigerian, (2) he applied for a supervisory/managerial position for which he was qualified, (3) he never received these promotions and (4) less qualified Ethiopian and white candidates were promoted instead. Pl.’s Opp’n at 8-9. The evidence submitted by the plaintiff, however, fails to support the proposition that he passed over for promotions in favor of Ethiopian and white candidates. See McDonnell Douglas Corp., 411 U.S. at 802, 93 S.Ct. 1817 (<HOLDING>); Bundy, 641 F.2d at 951 (opining that “to make Options: A. holding that the burden is on the plaintiff B. holding that the defendant did not deprive the plaintiff of a property interest in his continued employment because the plaintiff voluntarily resigned when he refused to report to work after being transferred to a new position C. holding that the statute incorporated all the rights and obligations of the contract emphasis added D. holding in an age discrimination case that even though a plaintiff need not revisit his prima facie case after a trial on the merits he still must show that he has met his ultimate burden of proving that the employer terminated him because of age emphasis added E. holding that the plaintiff carries the burden of showing that after he was rejected for a promotion the position remained open and the employer continued to seek applicants from persons of complainants qualifications emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the plaintiff carries the burden of showing that after he was rejected for a promotion the position remained open and the employer continued to seek applicants from persons of complainants qualifications emphasis added
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: PETITION McLean raises two claims in his habeas petition: (1) that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise an allegation of error concerning the State’s destruction of the Crimeline tape; and (2) that Florida’s capital sentencing scheme, which permits the imposition of a death sentence based on a simple majority jury recommendation violates the Eighth Amendment’s evolving standards of decency. We reject both claims and find that no habeas relief is warranted. While claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel are appropriately presented in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, McLean’s claim concerning the Crimeline tip is procedurally barred because he raised this exact argument in his postconviction motion. Johnston v. State, 63 So.3d 730, 747 (Fla.2011) (<HOLDING>); Knight v. State, 923 So.2d 387, 395 Options: A. holding that the claim of not being able to interview jurors was procedurally barred because the claim should and could have been raised on direct appeal B. holding that a similar claim in a rule 32 petition was procedurally barred because it was raised at trial and because it was raised on direct appeal C. holding that the caldwell claim is procedurally barred because it could have been raised on direct appeal but was not D. holding that the defendants habeas claim was procedurally barred because it could have been or was raised in his postconviction motion E. holding that a claim is proeedurally barred where it was not raised in the defendants motion for postconviction relief

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the defendants habeas claim was procedurally barred because it could have been or was raised in his postconviction motion
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 language of this Agreement is the result of arms ’ length negotiations between the parties. The wording of this Agreement shall be given its plain meaning with no presumptions in favor of one party or the other. Titles and headings shall not be construed to alter or control the substance of any provision.

assistant: Construction
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: duress, is voidable, not void, and the person claiming duress must act promptly to repudiate the contract or release or he will be deemed to have waived his right to do so.”), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 915, 103 S.Ct. 1896, 77 L.Ed.2d 285 (1983). The burden of proving ratification of an invalid release rests upon Leslie Fay. Leslie Fay also argues that Kishbaugh must be deemed to have ratified the release because he did not tender back the $10,200 he received as a result of signing it. Whether the OWBPA was intended to supplant the common law doctrine of ratification is the subject of intense debate. See Reid v. IBM Corp., No. 95 Civ. 1755, 1997 WL 357969, *14 (S.D.N.Y. June 26,1997) (quoting 29 U.S.C. § 626(f)(1)); compare Blistein v. St. John’s College, 74 F.3d 1459, 1466 (4th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Fleming v. U.S. Postal Serv., 27 F.3d 259, Options: A. holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur B. holding that for the purposes of standing to bring an action to recover on a contract privity is established by proving the defendant was a party to an enforceable contract with either the plaintiff or a party who assigned its cause of action to the plaintiff C. holding that a defendant who accepts the benefits of control release waives any argument that application of the control release program in the form of the forfeiture of gain time was an ex post violation because control release was enacted after the date of his or her offenses D. holding that party to contract could not with knowledge of the fraud which had been practiced upon him take any benefit under the contract or change the condition of the property and then repudiate the contract because the taking of a benefit is an election to ratify it E. holding adea release enforceable notwithstanding employers failure to conform the release to the owbpa because upon learning that the agreement is voidable the employee like the party who acted under duress can either avoid performance of the contract or accept its benefits and thereby ratify the contract

assistant: The best answer is E. holding adea release enforceable notwithstanding employers failure to conform the release to the owbpa because upon learning that the agreement is voidable the employee like the party who acted under duress can either avoid performance of the contract or accept its benefits and thereby ratify the contract
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 can access and change your billing information and payment method on the microsoft account management website and for your skype billing account by signing into your account at www.skype.com .

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: selection clause, the court must determine whether the forum selection clause is enforceable under the FAA. The FAA provides in relevant part: A written provision in ... a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transaction, or the refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof ... shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract. 9 U.S.C. § 2. Accordingly, the forum selection clause must be enforced unless there are legal or equitable grounds sufficient to revoke the agreement. Typically, the grounds for revoking an arbitration contract are the classic state-law c *3 (M.D.N.C. Mar.31, 2004) (unpublished) (<HOLDING>). IDC disagrees and relies on the FAA. As Options: A. holding that when a forum selection clause designates an arbitral forum the proper remedy is dismissal B. holding that venue for litigation was proper based on 28 usc 1441 even though forum selection clause provided that the courts of the commonwealth of massachusetts would be the exclusive forum C. holding order dismissing action without prejudice based on contractual forum selection clause is final and appealable because it terminates the litigation in the plaintiffs chosen forum D. holding that a permissive forum selection clause containing a waiver of any claims of forum non conveniens amounts to a mandatory forum selection clause at least where the plaintiff chose the designated forum E. holding that venue for litigation was proper based on 28 usc 1441 regardless of whether defendant was doing business in the district within the meaning of 28 usc 1391

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that venue for litigation was proper based on 28 usc 1441 even though forum selection clause provided that the courts of the commonwealth of massachusetts would be the exclusive forum
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: State argues that Brazell did not adopt the Fourth Circuit test because the Brazell court declined to consider the second part of the test after Brazell failed to establish substantial actual prejudice. We disagree. Although Brazell did not specifically acknowledge the adoption of the Fourth Circuit rule, the Court clearly adopted the Fourth Circuit’s test for pre-indictment delay by citing Howell and Automated Med. Laboratories when it discussed the two-part inquiry. Regardless, we find the Fourth Circuit standard to be the better rule. Requiring a higher burden of proof in proving improper motives on the part of the prosecution would put an almost impossible burden on defendants to maintain a Fifth Amendment due process claim in pre-indictment delay cases. See Howell, supra at 895 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the second part of the due Options: A. holding that physician is not required to identify and disclose every chance no matter how remote of the occurrence of every possible birth defect no matter how insignificant B. holding that the preindictment delay was a due process violation because actual prejudice was shown and the state had shown absolutely no need for any investigative delay C. holding no prejudice occurred because no new information was presented on the material matter in dispute D. holding that first amendment provides no protection against private actions no matter how egregious E. holding that to require proof of prosecutorial bad faith would mean that no matter how egregious the prejudice to a defendant and no matter how long the preindictment delay if a defendant cannot prove improper prosecutorial motive then no due process violation has occurred and that this conclusion on its face would violate fundamental conceptions of justice as well as the communitys sense of fair play

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that to require proof of prosecutorial bad faith would mean that no matter how egregious the prejudice to a defendant and no matter how long the preindictment delay if a defendant cannot prove improper prosecutorial motive then no due process violation has occurred and that this conclusion on its face would violate fundamental conceptions of justice as well as the communitys sense of fair play
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: J. Appellant believe that a traffic infraction had occurred, his stop of appellant’s car was permissible. See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 810, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996) (<HOLDING>); Holland v. State, 696 So.2d 757, 759 Options: A. holding that an officer may order a passenger out of a vehicle during a stop for a traffic infraction B. holding that probable cause to believe the traffic code had been violated rendered the stop reasonable under the fourth amendment regardless of officers subjective intent C. holding that a traffic stop is valid under the fourth amendment if the stop is based on an observed traffic violation or if the police officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that a traffic or equipment violation has occurred or is occurring D. holding this framework applies whether the traffic stop is based on probable cause or reasonable suspicion E. holding that a traffic stop is reasonable under the fourth amendment when police have probable cause to believe a traffic infraction has occurred

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a traffic stop is reasonable under the fourth amendment when police have probable cause to believe a traffic infraction has occurred
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: employer can be deemed “employees” under the statute. See O’Connor v. Davis, 126 F.3d 112, 115-16 (2nd Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1048, 140 L.Ed.2d 112 (1998) (“Where no financial benefit is obtained by the purported employee from the employer, no plausible employment relationship of any sort can be said to exist because ... compensation ... is an essential condition to the existence of an employer-employee relationship.” (internal quotations and citations omitted)); see also Haavistola v. Community Fire Co., 6 F.3d 211, 221-22 (4th Cir.1993) (reversing a grant of summary judgment for employer because question of whether benefits provided to plaintiff were sufficient “compensation” to render plaintiff an employee was one of disputed fact); cf. McClure, 460 F.2d at 557 (<HOLDING>). Congress did not intend Title VII to protect Options: A. holding that an employee who was terminated after his fiancee filed a charge of discrimination had standing to sue employer for retaliation where his fiancee was employed by the same company B. holding that the statute incorporated all the rights and obligations of the contract emphasis added C. holding that an application is pending from the time it is first filed emphasis added D. holding that an injury occurring in a parking lot which was leased but not controlled by an employer was compensable because the employer instructed its employees to park in that lot E. holding that an individual who was selected employed controlled trained and paid by the employer was an employee emphasis added

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an individual who was selected employed controlled trained and paid by the employer was an employee emphasis added
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 34 Wis. 2d at 294). However, we concluded that, when a defendant offers other acts evidence which is relevant, as Muckerheide argues here, the court may exclude such relevant evidence under the Whitty/Sullivan approach, if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the dangers set forth in Wis. Stat. § 904.03. Id. at 310-11. ¶ 32. The third step of the Sullivan analytical framework requires a court to weigh the probative value of the other acts evidence to determine if it is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. Wis. Stat. § 904.03; Sullivan, 216 Wis. 2d at 789. See also Scheidell, 227 Wis. 2d at 310-11 (<HOLDING>). Since we hold that the other acts evidence Options: A. holding that the probity of the evidence must be balanced against the considerations contained in 90403 B. holding that in determining whether to impose a duty the following factors must be balanced 1 the relationship between the parties 2 the reasonable foreseeability of harm to the person injured and 3 public policy concerns C. holding that to justify a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence 1 the evidence must have been discovered after trial 2 the failure to discover this evidence must not be attributable to a lack of due diligence on the part of the movant 3 the evidence must not be merely cumulative or impeaching 4 the evidence must be material and 5 the evidence must be likely to produce an acquittal if a new trial is granted D. recognizing that in parental termination proceedings the fundamental liberty interest of parents must be balanced with societys interest in protecting the welfare of children E. holding that to consider whether to apply a spoliation sanction the evidence must be relevant to an issue in the case and the party who destroyed the evidence must be under a duty to preserve the evidence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the probity of the evidence must be balanced against the considerations contained in 90403
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: delisted sections of those water bodies, Cantwell says that the mercury problem is not being resolved by Florida or the federal government, further diminishing her enjoyment of the wa ters. The harm that these individuals claim to have suffered — the pollution of waterbod-ies that they use and whose integrity the Clean Water Act is intended to protect — -is of a type the courts have recognized as an “injury in fact.” See, e.g., Alaska Ctr. for the Env’t v. Browner, 20 F.3d 981, 984-986 (9th Cir.1994) (concluding plaintiffs had standing under Clean Water Act to challenge the EPA’s failure to establish maximum pollutant levels for waterbodies in the state of Alaska); see also Japan Whaling Ass’n v. Amer. Cetacean Soc., 478 U.S. 221, 230, 106 S.Ct. 2860, 2866, 92 L.Ed.2d 166 (1986) (<HOLDING>); Biodiversity Legal Found, v. Badgley, 309 Options: A. holding that plaintiffs had established an injury in fact because the challenged activity directly affected their recreational aesthetic and economic interests B. holding that plaintiffs alleged a sufficient injury in fact in that their members whalewatching and studying would be adversely affected by continued whale harvesting and this type of injury was within zone of interests protected by statute C. holding that allegation of procedural injury does not affect the issues of injury in fact or causation D. holding that a plaintiffs claim of injury stemming from alleged procedural harm is insufficient to ground standing where the harm is uncoupled from any injury in fact or tied only to an undifferentiated injury common to all members of the public E. holding that to have standing a plaintiff must establish an injury in fact a casual connection between the injury and that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that plaintiffs alleged a sufficient injury in fact in that their members whalewatching and studying would be adversely affected by continued whale harvesting and this type of injury was within zone of interests protected by statute
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: policy that is nominally applicable” to the entire range of personnel subject to the Department’s authority. See Ahern v. Nassau County, 118 F.3d 118, 121 (2d Cir. 1997); Balgowan v. New Jersey Dep’t of Transp., 115 F.3d 214, 219 (3d Cir. 1997); Stanley v. City of Tracy, 120 F.3d 179, 184 (9th Cir. 1997); Carpenter v. City & County of Denver, 115 F.3d 765, 766-67 (10th Cir. 1997). The Court Services Units are staffed by a broad range of exempt and nonexempt employees. There is no basis for finding that this policy creates a “significant likelihood” of deductions for disciplinary action or other infractions. The Commonwealth presented evidence that the JPOs have not been subject to any disciplinary deductions in the wake of Garcia v. San Antonio Metro. Transit Auth., 469 U.S. 528 (1985) (<HOLDING>). The absence of prior deductions under this Options: A. holding that congress may abrogate a states immunity pursuant to its enforcement power under 5 of the fourteenth amendment B. holding that congress has power to subject the states to wage and hour regulation C. recognizing power of states to engage in some regulation of interstate commerce D. recognizing that congress has the power to completely divest the courts of their sentencing discretion and that congress granted broad authority to the sentencing commission guided by specific goals and principles E. holding that where congress has directed the agency to issue a rule without regard to any other provision of statute or regulation that applies to issuance of such rule congress has amended the law and does not offend the constitution

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that congress has power to subject the states to wage and hour regulation
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 in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and said counterparts shall constitute but one and the same instrument. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement.

assistant: Counterparts