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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Note Purchase Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute but one instrument, and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by each party hereto and delivered to the other parties. Delivery of an executed counterpart of the Note Purchase Agreement by facsimile transmission or electronic mail in PDF form shall be as effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each person who is or shall have been a member of the Committee, or of the Board, or an officer of the Company to whom authority was delegated in accordance with Article 4 shall be indemnified and held harmless by the Company against and from any loss, cost, liability, or expense that may be imposed upon or reasonably incurred by him or her in connection with or resulting from any claim, action, suit, or proceeding to which he or she may be a party or in which he or she may be involved by reason of any action taken or failure to act under the Plan and against and from any and all amounts paid by him or her in settlement thereof, with the Company’s approval, or paid by him or her in satisfaction of any judgment in any such action, suit, or proceeding against him or her, provided he or she shall give the Company an opportunity, at its own expense, to handle and defend the same before he or she undertakes to handle and defend it on his or her own behalf, unless such loss, cost, liability, or expense is a result of his or her own willful misconduct or except as expressly provided by statute. The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of any other rights of indemnification to which such persons may be entitled under the Company’s charter or bylaws, as a matter of law, or otherwise, or any power that the Company may have to indemnify them or hold them harmless.

assistant: Indemnifications
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 Committee shall certify in writing its determination and approval that the applicable performance goal or goals have been satisfied and the applicable Performance Level achieved. Those shares of restricted Stock that vest upon achievement of the applicable performance goals as determined by the Committee will become vested on the Vesting Date. The portion of the Award that does not otherwise vest in accordance with this Schedule 4 will be forfeited and all related rights with respect to all unvested shares of restricted Stock that are subject to the Award shall be forfeited by the Participant as of the Vesting Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No provision of this Agreement may be waived, modified or discharged unless such waiver, modification or discharge is agreed to in writing signed by Indemnitee and the Company. No waiver by either party hereto at any time of any breach by the other party hereto or compliance with any condition or provision of this Agreement to be performed by such other party shall be deemed a waiver of similar or dissimilar provisions or conditions at the same or at any prior or subsequent time. No agreements or representations, oral or otherwise, expressed or implied with respect to the subject matter hereof have been made by either party that are not set forth expressly in this Agreement. References to Sections are to references to Sections of this 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) Executive shall be entitled to up to five (5) weeks of paid vacation in each of calendar year during the term. Unused vacation days shall accrue up to a maximum of 37.5 days, and upon termination of employment for any reason, Executive will receive a lump sum payment for accrued but unused vacation days.

assistant: Vacations
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 Award Agreement, the Plan and any other agreements, schedules , exhibits and other documents referred to herein or therein constitute the entire agreement and understanding between the parties in respect of the subject matter hereof and supersede all prior and contemporaneous arrangements, agreements and understandings, both oral and written, whether in term sheets, presentations or otherwise, between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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: (noting that disability plan need not provide same benefits for all disabilities); Ford, 145 F.3d at 608 (“The ADA does not require coverage for every type of disability.”); Parker v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 121 F.3d 1006, 1015-19 (6th Cir.1997) (en banc) (“The disparity in benefits [is permitted] by the ADA because the ADA does not mandate equality ...”); EEOC v. CNA Ins. Co., 96 F.3d 1039, 1044-45 (7th Cir.1996) (upholding plan that promised physical-disability benefits until age 65, but mental-disability benefits only for two years); Krauel v. Iowa Methodist Med. Ctr., 95 F.3d 674, 678 (8th Cir.1996) (ruling that excluding one disability from coverage does not violate ADA if exclusion applies to all individuals); see also Modderno v. King, 82 F.3d 1059, 1061 (D.C.Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). Today, this court joins the numerous courts Options: A. holding that punitive damages may not be awarded in suits brought under 202 of the ada and 504 of the rehabilitation act B. recognizing there is some confusion among the circuit courts as to the availability of damages under 504 of the rehabilitation act and without expressing an opinion on the matter noting that courts generally agree damages are available for violations of 504 C. holding 504 of the rehabilitation act does not require equivalent benefits for different disabilities D. holding that post2001 new york was clearly subject to suit under section 504 of the rehabilitation act E. holding rehabilitation act applicable

assistant: The best answer is C. holding 504 of the rehabilitation act does not require equivalent benefits for different disabilities
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: “Embedded Software” warranty. No record evidence supports Plaintiffs claim that his television’s inability to process a native 1080p signal through its HDMI ports is software-related. To the extent this claim is based on Mitsubishi’s use of the phrase “1080p” to describe Plaintiffs television, under Cal. Com.Code § 2813, it also fails. Notwithstanding counsel’s argument to the contrary, Plaintiffs television satisfies his expert’s definition of 1080p, insofar as it is ready to receive a native 1080p signal through its antenna if and when broadcasters begin transmitting in 1080p. Plaintiffs belated reliance on the television’s “Parts” warranty is unavailing, as he never invoked that warranty below. See Carmen v. S.F. Unified Sch. Dist., 237 F.3d 1026, 1029, 1031 (9th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>); Harik v. Cal. Teachers Ass’n, 326 F.3d 1042, Options: A. holding that a court need not examine the entire file for evidence establishing a genuine issue of fact where the evidence is not set forth in the opposing papers with adequate references so that it could conveniently be found B. holding that the district court need not examine the entire file for evidence establishing the absence of a genuine issue of fact where the evidenceis not set forth in the moving papers with adequate references so that it could conveniently be found C. holding that the court is not obligated to comb the record in order to make the plaintiffs arguments for it D. holding that a district court need not comb the record to find some reason to deny a motion for summary judgment particularly where the evidence is not set forth in the opposing papers with adequate references so that it could conveniently be found E. holding that while a district court has discretion to consider other materials in the record it has no obligation to do so where the evidence is not set forth in the opposing papers with adequate references so that it could conveniently be found

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a district court need not comb the record to find some reason to deny a motion for summary judgment particularly where the evidence is not set forth in the opposing papers with adequate references so that it could conveniently be found
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of damages against those individuals may have a deterrent effect. In sum, viewing as a whole the nature and effect of the suit, Plaintiff argues that the potential of the suit to impact the-Illinois populace writ large means that (1) Plaintiff is a real party in interest, (2) the Court thus need not look beyond the complaint to determine whether unnamed plaintiffs have a more significant stake in the outcome of the litigation, and (3) the Court lacks diversity jurisdiction under CAFA and should remand the case to state court. See Hunt Int’l, 481 F.Supp. at 74 (remanding an action in which the Attorney General sought injunctive and monetary relief despite the fact that unnamed defrauded residents also stood to benefit from the suit); see also Lann, 167 Ill.Dec. 252, 587 N.E.2d at 524 (<HOLDING>). Defendants raise two arguments in response, Options: A. holding that equitable restitution is available but that legal restitution is not B. holding that six employees bringing suit under title vii were not in privity with the united states which had brought a previous suit against the same employer because the employees sought a type of relief which the united states had not sought C. holding that the fact that one of the remedies sought by the state of kansas is restitution to the allegedly aggrieved kansas consumers does not transform the state of kansas into a citizen for purposes of establishing diversity jurisdiction D. holding that injured consumers for whom the state sought restitution were not real parties in the states parens patriae suit E. holding a suit against an agency of the state is a suit against the state

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that injured consumers for whom the state sought restitution were not real parties in the states parens patriae suit
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: Ford Motor Credit Company, filed this suit against appellees Mells for writ of possession of an automobile. The appellant alleges in the complaint that it sold this automobile to the appellees under a retail installment contract, of which the appellees are in default. The appellant seeks to exercise its option under the contract to accelerate the unpaid principal balance. The appellees filed a counterclaim alleging, inter alia, that the appellant violated TILA and Regulation Z by failing to state in the contract the terms of the acceleration clause. The parties’ contract does state that in the event of voluntary prepayment there shall be a rebate of the unearned portion of the finance charge computed under the “sum of the digits” method af Cir. 1978), clarified 576 F2d 1156 (1978) (<HOLDING>). In Milhollin, the United States District Options: A. holding that the existence of the acceleration clause is required to be disclosed except when the creditor is under a legal obligation to treat acceleration and voluntary prepayment alike for rebate purposes B. holding lender loses right to a premium when it elects to accelerate the debt and declining to allow lender to avoid the consequences of its choice of acceleration C. holding that when a creditor is oversecured solvency is not required for the creditor to be entitled to postpetition interest and fees and granting contractual default interest to the oversecured creditor of approximately 24 D. holding that the equal protection clause is essentially a direction that all persons similarly situated should be treated alike E. recognizing that when a creditor does not receive adequate notice the creditor is not bound by the confirmation order

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the existence of the acceleration clause is required to be disclosed except when the creditor is under a legal obligation to treat acceleration and voluntary prepayment alike for rebate purposes
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: governments are held to the strict liability standard in the same manner as any other potentially responsible party. However, if the Government has acquired ownership or control of the facility involuntarily, as a result of its sovereign function, or the entity was responding to an emergency caused by the release of hazardous substances from a facility owned by another party, the State or local government is only liable for gross negligence or willful misconduct. 42 U.S.C. § 9607(d)(2); see Murtha, 958 F.2d at 1198. In order to establish that a Government entity is subject to strict liability as an operator, a plaintiff must show some nexus to the site other than its statutory obligation to respond to an emergency. See Stilloe v. Almy Bros., Inc., 782 F.Supp. 731, 736 (N.D.N.Y.1992) (<HOLDING>). Mere regulatory oversight by the Government Options: A. holding that the state was not liable as an operator for responding to a site to conduct cleanup activities B. holding that an action by plaintiffs who had a legal obligation to conduct cleanup pursuant to a 106 order and then sought costs for cleanup from other prps was the quintessential action for contribution C. holding that the department of transportation was liable under the mtca but that it was not responsible for any of the cleanup costs D. holding that consulting engineer was not liable for workplace injury where it was not contractually responsible for safety precautions and did not exercise actual control of the work site E. holding that debtor was liable to the commonwealth for past and future cleanup costs

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the state was not liable as an operator for responding to a site to conduct cleanup activities
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: exists; and (3) whether the right to arbitration was waived.” Seifert v. U.S. Home Corp., 750 So.2d 633, 636 (Fla.1999); Truly Nolen of Am., Inc. v. King Cole Condo. Ass’n, 143 So.3d 1015, 1016-17 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014). The parties agree that SELA has not waived its right to arbitrate and that their dispute is subject to the arbitration provision if the contract and that provision are valid. Thus, the only issue presented by this appeal is the first of those elements: whether a valid written agreement to arbitrate exists. The question of which decision-maker (the trial court or the arbitrator) should determine whether a valid agreement exists would appear on its surface to be a simple one, but the case law from federal and Florida courts makes that dete W.3d 872, 881-82 (Tex.Ct.App.2011) (<HOLDING>). We agree with and join the above holdings due Options: A. holding that the trial court must determine whether there was an agreement to arbitrate when the party contesting arbitration claimed she had never signed the contract or intended to be bound B. holding that the ninth circuit looks to state contract law to determine whether an arbitration award is valid C. holding that the trial court must determine whether an agreement to arbitrate was reached when several contracts the subject of a class action allegedly did not contain an arbitration provision D. recognizing that incorporated document containing arbitration clause is not necessarily required to be attached to the contract E. holding that the trial court must determine whether a subsequent contract superseded and invalidated a prior contract containing an arbitration provision

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the trial court must determine whether a subsequent contract superseded and invalidated a prior contract containing an arbitration provision
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: official policy, in flicts the injury that the government as an entity is responsible under § 1983. Id. at 691-94, 98 S.Ct. 2018 (emphasis added). Here, the record does not contain any plausible allegations that the Municipality was acting in a sovereign capacity pursuant to any statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom when it terminated the contract and took over the construction site and temporarily detained OSSAM’s property. There is no allegation in the Complaint that the Municipality acted pursuant to a statute, ordinance, or regulation. The complaint did state that the Municipality implemented “customs and policies” wh sometimes lead to governmental liability for breach of contract. See United States v. Winstar Corn,, 518 U.S. 839, 897, 116 S.Ct. 2432, 135 L.Ed.2d 964 (1996) (<HOLDING>). 7 . We do not suggest here that a Options: A. holding that the court was not bound by the parties agreement that contracts were unambiguous and holding that contracts were ambiguous B. holding that at will contracts of employment are subject to tortious interference with contracts claims C. holding that the enactment of firrea breached certain government contracts D. holding that the government was not bound by its waivers in three prior contracts E. holding that a breach of contract claim was properly dismissed where plaintiff did not identify the contracts allegedly breached

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the enactment of firrea breached certain government contracts
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 Subsidiary Guarantor covenants and agrees that the Obligations will be paid strictly in accordance with their respective terms regardless of any law, regulation or order now or hereafter in effect in any jurisdiction affecting any of such terms or the rights of the Administrative Agent or any Bank with respect thereto. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Subsidiary Guarantor’s obligations hereunder with respect to any Obligation shall not be discharged by a payment in a currency other than the currency in which such Obligation is denominated (the “ Obligation Currency ”) or at a place other than the place specified for the payment of such Obligation, whether pursuant to a judgment or otherwise, to the extent that the amount so paid on conversion to the Obligation Currency and transferred to New York, New York, U.S.A., under normal banking procedures does not yield the amount of Obligation Currency due thereunder.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Use or disclose PHI as necessary to perform its obligations under the Underlying Contracts. Such Use, disclosure or request of PHI shall utilize a limited data set if practicable or otherwise the minimum necessary PHI to accomplish the i n tended result of the Use, disclosure or request. Company also agrees to implement and follow appropriate minimum necessary policies in the perform a nce of its obligations under this Agreement.

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: the resulting unfairness to the respondent if an argument or issue was first raised in the reply brief and the respondent had no opportunity to respond. See Brown, 853 P.2d at 854 n. 1; 5 Am.Jur.2d Appellate Review § 560. 124 However, fairness to the respondent is not a concern if it is the respondent who first raises an issue in the opposing brief. In fact, our appellate rules expressly direct an appellant to "answer[ ] any new matter set forth in the opposing brief." Utah R.App.P. 24(c). Therefore, if an appellant responds in the reply brief to a new issue raised by the appellee in its opposing brief, the issue is not waived. This is also generally the rule with other courts that have considered this issue. See, eg., Pachla v. Saunders Sys., Inc., 899 F.2d 496, 502 (6th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); North v. Madison Area Ass'n for Retarded Options: A. holding that issue first raised in appellees brief and then answered in appellants reply brief was properly raised for review B. holding that an argument raised only in fact section of opening brief and in reply brief is not properly raised C. holding that issue raised for the first time in reply brief was waived D. holding issue first addressed in appellants reply brief was not waived because it was in response to argument first presented in appellees brief E. holding argument not raised in opening brief but raised for the first time in reply brief was waived

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that issue first raised in appellees brief and then answered in appellants reply brief was properly raised for review
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New Jersey without reference to principles of conflict of laws. Executive irrevocably consents to the personal jurisdiction of the state and/or federal courts with jurisdiction to hear claims arising out of Tinton Falls, New Jersey for any and all disputes arising out of or related to this Agreement, and the Parties agree that such courts shall be the exclusive forum for any and all disputes arising out of or related to this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: employee). Accordingly, Toney’s breach of contract claim will be dismissed. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Select Hospital has moved for summary judgment on Toney’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress on the dual bases that (1) she has failed to identify, much less present proof of conduct rising to the level of extreme and outrageous conduct required for a cognizable claim, see Raiola v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 872 So.2d 79, 85 (Miss.Ct.App.2004) (noting that “[o]nly in the most unusual cases does the conduct move out of the realm of an ordinary employment dispute into the classification of extreme and outrageous, as required for the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress”); Pegues v. Emerson Elec. Co., 913 F.Supp. 976, 982 (N.D.Miss.1996) (<HOLDING>); and (2) she has not presented proof that she Options: A. holding that assistant principals allegedly defective investigation did not rise to the level of extreme and outrageous conduct B. holding that mere insults indignities and threats are not extreme and outrageous acts C. holding that claims in an employment setting are viable only when the employers conduct is so outrageous in character and so extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community D. holding that spreading of deliberately false statements that employee in effect committed forgery constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct E. holding that even if the plaintiffstudent proved her claim of discrimination on the basis of disability the schools conduct was not so extreme or outrageous as to be intolerable in a civilized community

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that claims in an employment setting are viable only when the employers conduct is so outrageous in character and so extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community
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: than defiance of Earley. See Garner v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Corr. Servs., 39 A.D.3d 1019, 831 N.Y.S.2d 923 (3d Dep’t 2007); People v. Thomas, 35 A.D.3d 192, 826 N.Y.S.2d 36 (1st Dep’t 2006). It was not until 2008 that the New York Court of Appeals held that administrative imposition of PRS by DOC was contrary to law. See Garner v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Corr. Servs., 10 N.Y.3d 358, 859 N.Y.S.2d 590, 889 N.E.2d 467 (2008); People v. Sparber, 10 N.Y.3d 457, 859 N.Y.S.2d 582, 889 N.E.2d 459 (2008). In circumstances of such apparent judicial confusion as to the constitutional propriety of a statutory mandate, qualified immunity might well continue to shield state officials acting pursuant to that statute. See generally Wilson v. Layne, 526 U.S. 603, 617, 119 S.Ct. 1692, 143 L.Ed.2d 818 (1999) (<HOLDING>); see also id. at 618, 119 S.Ct. 1692 (“If Options: A. holding that state officials cannot have been expected to predict the future course of constitutional law internal quotation marks omitted B. holding that compliance with rule 3 is both a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite to appeal internal quotation marks omitted C. holding the deprivation of the inmates property interest in his mail is not a cognizable constitutional injury given the availability of adequate state postdeprivation remedies under new york law internal quotation marks omitted D. holding that a ruling from a prior decision of this court becomes the law of the case that cannot be challenged in a later proceeding quotation marks omitted E. holding that independent review is not de novo review of the constitutional issue but only a means to determine whether the state court decision is objectively unreasonable internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that state officials cannot have been expected to predict the future course of constitutional law internal quotation marks omitted
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 outstanding principal balance of this Note shall bear i nterest (computed on the basis of a 360-day year, actual days e l apsed) e i ther (i) at a fluctuating rate per annum determined by Bank to be seventy-five hundredths percent (0.75%) above Daily One Month LIBOR in effect from t i me to time, or (ii) at a fixed rate per annum determined by Bank to be seventy-five hundredths percent (0 . 75%) above LIBOR in effect on the first day of the applicable LIBOR Per iod. Bank is hereby authorized to note the date , pr i ncipal amount and interest rate applicable thereto and any payments made the reon on Bank's books and records (either manually or by electronic entry) and/or on any schedule attached to this Note , wh i ch notations shall be prima facie evidence of the accuracy of the information noted.

assistant: Interests
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: regarding Appellant’s sores. Without objection, Officer Meyer testified: that upon pulling her over, he noticed her hand shaking; that her behavior was “unusual”; that after obtaining her consent to search the car, he found a glass pipe with off-white residue; that upon her arrest he found another glass pipe in the trunk of Appellant’s car; and that upon a subsequent search, he found two small baggies containing a crystalline residue. This testimony, along with the items themselves and a lab report properly admitted into evidence, also establish the same essential fact as the testimony regarding Appellant’s sores — that Appellant used methamphetamine. The testimony regarding Appellant’s sores was, therefore, not prejudicial. See State v. Ponder, 950 S.W.2d 900, 910 (Mo.App. S.D.1997) (<HOLDING>). Point I is denied. Point II Appellant’s Options: A. holding admission of challenged evidence is harmless error where the record contains other properly admitted evidence that independently establishes guilt B. holding improperly admitted evidence was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt C. holding that admission of evidence is harmless if it is cumulative to other legitimately admitted evidence that establishes a defendants guilt beyond a reasonable doubt D. holding that if evidence is improperly admitted but other evidence establishes essentially the same facts there is no prejudice to the accused and no reversible error E. holding improperly admitted evidence may be harmless if other evidence of guilt is overwhelming and the error is insignificant by comparison

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that if evidence is improperly admitted but other evidence establishes essentially the same facts there is no prejudice to the accused and no reversible 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: As noted in Moragne v. States Marine Lines, 398 U.S. 375, 382, 90 S.Ct. 1772, 1778, 26 L.Ed.2d 339, 346 (1970), [t]he doctrine found practical justification in the fact that the punishment for the felony was death of the felon and the forfeiture of his property to the Crown; thus, after the crime had been punished, nothing remained of the felon or his property on which to base a civil action. [Giardina, supra, 111 N.J. at 423 n. 1, 545 A.2d 139.] 3 The issue regarding conscious pain and suffering also arises where an accident victim never regains full consciousness before dying, barring recovery under a survival statute even where the victim survives for a considerable length of time after being injured. See Tri-State Poultry Coop. v. Carey, 190 Md. 116, 57 A.2d 812, 814-18 (1948) (<HOLDING>). GARIBALDI, J., concurring. I agree that Options: A. recognizing as separate from pain and suffering B. holding conscious pain is necessary element to maintenance of survival action and even survival of injuries for considerable length of time cannot form basis for recovery of damages unless decedent consciously experienced pain and suffering C. recognizing as an element of pain and suffering D. holding that claims for pain and suffering are the separate property of a spouse E. holding that plaintiffs made a sufficient claim for damages for predeath pain and suffering by decedent

assistant: The best answer is B. holding conscious pain is necessary element to maintenance of survival action and even survival of injuries for considerable length of time cannot form basis for recovery of damages unless decedent consciously experienced pain and suffering
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Party (a) submits to the jurisdiction of any state or federal court sitting in the City of Dover or Wilmington in the State of Delaware in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement (including any action or proceeding for the enforcement of any arbitral award made in connection with any arbitration of a dispute hereunder), (b) agrees that all claims in respect of such action or proceeding may be heard and determined in any such court, (c) waives any claim of inconvenient forum or other challenge to venue in such court, (d) agrees not to bring any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement in any other court. Each Party agrees to accept service of any summons, complaint or other initial pleading made in the manner provided for the giving of notices in Section 8 .8, provided that nothing in this Section 8.12 shall affect the right of any Party to serve such summons, complaint or other initial pleading in any other manner permitted by Law.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 219-20 (S.D.N.Y.1996) (“Many courts have held that stray remarks in the workplace, by themselves, and without a demonstrated nexus to the co “if you were 20 years younger and blonde, and beautiful, you’d get [a bracelet]” was a stray remark); Pasha v. William M. Mercer Consulting, No. 00 Civ. 8362, 2004 WL 188077, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Feb.2, 2004) (no finding of age discrimination where supervisors talk about recruiting younger people and supervisor told plaintiff that they should be thinking of retirement at their age). Stating that someone within the employee’s protected group will better understand that employee, as Stadmeyer did when he said that Tomassi relates well to senior residents, is also a stray remark, de la Cruz v. New York City Human Res. Admin., 82 F.3d 16, 22 (2d Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, Stadmeyer’s alleged Options: A. holding that the district courts question do you also understand that under some circumstances you or the government may have the right to appeal any sentence that i impose did not comply with rule llbln and failed to properly notify the defendant about the waiver of his appellate rights B. holding superiors statement a stray remark because another employee was the plaintiffs immediate supervisor and had the authority to hire and fire subordinates C. holding hispanic supervisor will understand you better to be stray remark D. holding that verbal threats such as we going to get you you better drop the suit do not rise to the level of adverse action E. holding that a comment made by a person who played no role in the employment decision was a stray remark that lacked any probative value as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is C. holding hispanic supervisor will understand you better to be stray remark
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 Guarantee represents the entire agreement and understanding of this parties concerning the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all other prior agreements, understandings, negotiations and discussions, representations, warranties, commitments, proposals, offers and contracts concerning the subject matter hereof, whether oral or written.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Guarantor expressly, unconditionally and irrevocably waives any and all rights it may have now or in the future under any statute, or at common law, or at law or in equity, or otherwise, to compel the Lender or any other Holder to marshal assets or to proceed in respect of the Obligations guaranteed hereunder against any Credit Party or Subsidiary, any other Person or against any security for the payment and performance of the Obligations before proceeding against, or as a condition to proceeding against, such Guarantor. Each Guarantor acknowledges and agrees that it will receive substantial direct and indirect benefits from the financing arrangements contemplated by this Agreement and the other Transaction Documents and that the waivers set forth in this Article 8 are knowingly made in contemplation of such benefits. Each Guarantor acknowledges and agrees that the foregoing waivers are of the essence of the transaction contemplated by this Agreement and the other Transaction Documents and that, but for the provisions of this Article 8 and such waivers, the Lender would decline to enter into this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive also agrees and covenants that he will not in any way (directly or indirectly) do or say anything at any time which disparages the Company, its business interests or reputation, or any of its individual directors, officers, employees, or agents. The Company agrees that its current directors and executive officers will not disparage Executive. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude Executive, in connection with a search for prospective employment or business opportunities, from describing his responsibilities and accomplishments while employed by the Company. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude Executive or the Company’s directors and executive officers from responding to inquiries from any Federal, state or other regulatory agency having authority over the Company or Independence National Bank.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be terminated by any Purchaser or by the Company with respect to any Purchaser, as to such Purchaser’s obligations hereunder only and without any effect whatsoever on the obligations between the Company and the other Purchasers, by written notice to the other parties, if the Closing has not been consummated on or before May 27, 2016; provided, however, that no such termination will affect the right of any party to sue for any breach by any other party (or parties).

assistant: Terminations
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, and any schedules or exhibits hereto, embody the entire agreement between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersede any and all other discussions, understandings, and agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties relating to the subject matter of this 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: Law Third, Torts: Liability for Economic Harm, 89 A.L.I. Proc. 22, 46-47 (2012). The A.L.I. states that “[o]nce it is approved by the membership at an Annual Meeting, a Tentative Draft . . . represents the most current statement of the American Law Institute’s position on the subject and may be cited in opinions or briefs . . . until the official text is published.” Overview, Project Development, Am. Law Inst., http://www.ali.org/index. cfm?fuseaction=projects.main. 4 I add the “exeept-when-it-doesn’t” caveat because courts have recognized a host of exceptions to this general principle, such that the broad statement quoted above doesn’t actually reflect the state of the law. See, e.g., Long Trail House Condo. Ass’n v. Engelberth Constr., Inc., 2012 VT 80, ¶ 13, 192 Vt. 322, 59 A.3d 752 (<HOLDING>) (quotations omitted); Springfield Options: A. holding that defendant may be liable in tort when it has breached a duty of reasonable care distinct from its contractual obligations because a tort obligation is a duty imposed by law apart from and independent of promises made and therefore apart from the manifested intention of the parties to a contract B. holding that the law imposes on every person who enters upon an active course of conduct the positive duty to exercise ordinary care to protect others from harm and calls a violation of that duty negligence that a complete binding contract between the parties is not a prerequisite to a duty to use due care in ones actions and that architects may be held liable for a breach of the duty of care and breach of contract that results in foreseeable injury economic or otherwise C. holding that a duty of care may arise out of a contractual relationship between two parties D. recognizing that the duty arises not from the terms of the insurance contract but from an obligation imposed in law as a result of the special relationship E. recognizing that there might be recovery for purely economic losses in a limited class of cases involving parties who have a special relationship which creates a duty of care independent of contract obligations such as the obligation to avoid violating a professional duty

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that there might be recovery for purely economic losses in a limited class of cases involving parties who have a special relationship which creates a duty of care independent of contract obligations such as the obligation to avoid violating a professional duty
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: Penn Central Transportation Company, 944 F.2d 164, 165-66 (3d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 906, 112 S.Ct. 1262, 117 L.Ed.2d 491 (1992). 7 .Id. at 166. 8 . For a discussion of the ownership and operational history of the Reading Terminal, see Reading Company v. City of Philadelphia, 823 F.Supp. 1218, 1222-25 (E.D.Pa.1993). 9 . Conrail has now dropped its motion for summary judgment on the immunity portion of Count II. ConraiTs Memorandum of Law in Further Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment at 1. The summary judgment motions of the Uni .R. 406, 409 (Sp.Ct.R.R.R.A.1990) (concluding that an interpretation of language in the FSP. is within the Special Court’s jurisdiction); Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Penn Central Corporation, 533 F.Supp. 1351, 1353-55 (Sp.Ct.R.R.R.A.1982) (<HOLDING>); Stratford Land and Improvement Company, Inc. Options: A. holding that interpretation of contract documents regulations or a solicitation present no disputed issues of material fact and is a question of law B. holding that the court had jurisdiction to decide issues relating to the fsp conveyance orders and an agreement entered pursuant to the conveyance orders C. holding that the interpretation of both conveyance orders and documents is within the jurisdictional grant of 209e2 D. recognizing that deference to an agencys interpretation of the written law is appropriate only when that interpretation is within the written laws language E. holding erisa plan interpretation is simply one of contract interpretation

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the interpretation of both conveyance orders and documents is within the jurisdictional grant of 209e2
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: Channel Master Satellite Sys., Inc. v. JFD Elecs. Corp., 748 F.Supp. 373, 379 n. 7 (E.D.N.C.1990). Moreover, courts have held under the analogous provisions of CERCLA that the types of activities undertaken by plaintiffs — investigating and assessing the presence of hazardous substances — result in recoverable response costs. Darbouze, 1998 WL 512941, at *6-*7, *10 (awarding costs for investigating presence of hazardous substances on property under CERCLA and HSCA); see Fallowfield Dev. Corp. v. Strunk, No. 89-8644, 1990 WL 52745, 1990 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 4820, at *11 (E.D.Pa. April 23, 1990) (finding that costs related to testing and evaluating the contamination constitute recoverable costs under CERCLA); Wickland Oil Terminals v. Asarco, Inc., 792 F.2d 887, 892 (9th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>); In re Allegheny Int’l Inc., 126 B.R. 919, 926 Options: A. holding that no recovery exists for speculative damages B. holding that investigatory costs are considered costs of response under cercla C. holding that debtor was liable to the commonwealth for past and future cleanup costs D. holding that no distinction exists between investigatory costs and onsite cleanup costs for purposes of recovery E. holding that courier and messenger costs are not taxable costs

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that no distinction exists between investigatory costs and onsite cleanup costs for purposes of recovery