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 execution, delivery and performance by the Company of the Transaction Documents and the offer, issuance and sale of the Securities require no consent of, action by or in respect of, or filing with, any governmental authority other than those that have been made or obtained prior to the Effective Date and post-sale filings pursuant to securities Laws and the rules and regulations of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, which the Company undertakes to file within the applicable time periods.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: As of the Closing Date, there are no actions, investigations, suits or proceedings pending or, to the knowledge of any the Borrower, threatened, at law, in equity or in arbitration, before any court, other Governmental Authority, Self-Regulatory Organization, arbitrator or other Person, (i) against or affecting the Parent Borrower or any Subsidiary thereof or any of their respective properties that would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, except as set forth in the Form 10-K filed by the Parent Borrower with the SEC on February 14, 2014 (and there have been no material adverse developments since such date in any such actions, investigations, suits or proceedings disclosed in such Form 10-K), or (ii) with respect to this Agreement, any of the other Credit Documents or any of the other transactions contemplated hereby or thereby.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Flack, 239 B.R. 155, 164 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 1999) ("The automatic stay is a significant benefit for debtors and a burden to creditors, and should be generally reserved for instances in which there is a bankruptcy filing. It is presumptuous to create through pre-filing contact, except in the most extreme instances not present in this case, some sort of hybrid stay not contemplated by Congress that has had ample opportunity to create such a provision. Such contact is subject to abuse, denigrates the significance of the stay and serves as a trap for unwary creditors who have a right to generally expect that they are provided reasonable, actual notice of an actual bankruptcy filing before ceasing collection efforts.”); Tese-Milner v. Moon (In re Moon), 385 B.R. 541, 557 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.2008) (<HOLDING>). 12 . West Virginia certificates of title were Options: A. holding that the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over counterclaims asserted by the bankruptcy estate against a creditor where the claim is a state law action independent of the federal bankruptcy law and not necessarily resolvable by a ruling on the creditors proof of claim in the bankruptcy emphasis added B. holding that creditor did not have actual knowledge of the bankruptcy filing where the debtor informed creditor of the possibility that a bankruptcy case would be filed C. holding that creditor lacked appellate standing to appeal order of bankruptcy court absent permission of bankruptcy court D. holding creditor possessed notice of the bankruptcy case at a date early enough for them to act upon their knowledge E. holding that a time limit for filing a complaint as a creditor in bankruptcy proceedings is not jurisdictional

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that creditor did not have actual knowledge of the bankruptcy filing where the debtor informed creditor of the possibility that a bankruptcy case would be filed
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 Company has not otherwise entered into any arrangement regarding the payment of any brokerage fees, commissions or finder’s fees in connection with the purchase of the Stock that will result in any liability on the part of Sellers.

assistant: Brokers
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 Company shall pay all Registration Expenses in connection with a registration pursuant to this Article V, provided that each holder of Registrable Securities participating in an offering shall pay all applicable underwriting fees, discounts and commissions, agency fees, brokers' commissions and transfer taxes, if any, on the Registrable Securities sold by such holder, and similar charges.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: law. Whether Guy's Conerete's conduct is the proximate cause of Dawn's injuries is a question of fact for the jury to determine. Genuine issues of material fact exist and summary judgment would not have been appropriate on this issue. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the trial court's denial of the motions for summary judgment filed by Guy's Concrete - and Modern. - Affirmed. BARNES and RILEY, JJ., concur. 1 . We direct Modern's attention to Ind.App. Rule 46(A)(10) which requires an appellant's brief to "include e Webb analysis because our supreme court and this court have already held that contractors performing work owe a duty to third persons rightfully on the construction premises. See, e.g., Mangold ex rel. Mangold v. Ind. Dep't of Natural Res., 756 N.E.2d 970, 977 (Ind.2001) (<HOLDING>). 5 . Modern also appears to argue that its Options: A. holding that a school district was not required to move a nurse to a students neighborhood school to comply with the idea B. holding that it was unnecessary to engage in the threepart webb test to determine if the school had some other additional duty because our supreme court had already declared the nature of the duty a school owes its students C. holding that since the court already determined that it had general jurisdiction over a defendant it was unnecessary to engage in the specific jurisdiction analysis D. holding that schools have no duty under the due process clause to protect students from assaults by other students even where the school knew or should have known of the danger presented E. holding that a school had no duty to protect pedestrian from student

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that it was unnecessary to engage in the threepart webb test to determine if the school had some other additional duty because our supreme court had already declared the nature of the duty a school owes its students
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment may be executed by one or more of the parties to this Amendment on any number of separate counterparts, and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed signature page of this Amendment by email or facsimile transmission shall be 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: The Company expressly acknowledges and agrees that (i) this Section 22 constitutes an agreement to arbitrate between the Company and such Holder (and constitutes an arbitration agreement) under § 7501, et seq. of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (“ CPLR ”) and that each party shall be entitled to compel arbitration pursuant to CPLR § 7503(a) in order to compel compliance with this Section 22, (ii) a dispute relating to a Conversion Price includes, without limitation, disputes as to (1) the consideration per share at which an issuance or deemed issuance of Common Stock occurred, and (2) whether an agreement, instrument, security or the like constitutes an Option or Convertible Security, (iii) the terms of this Certificate of Designations and the Purchase Agreement shall serve as the basis for the selected investment bank’s resolution of the applicable dispute, such investment bank shall be entitled (and is hereby expressly authorized) to make all findings, determinations and the like that such investment bank determines are required to be made by such investment bank in connection with its resolution of such dispute and in resolving such dispute such investment bank shall apply such findings, determinations and the like to the terms of this Certificate of Designations and the Purchase Agreement, (iv) the terms of this Certificate of Designations and each other applicable Transaction Document shall serve as the basis for the selected accountant’s or accounting firm’s performance of the applicable arithmetic calculation, (v) for clarification purposes and without implication that the contrary would otherwise be true, disputes relating to matters described in Section 22(a) shall be governed by Section 22(a) and not by Section 22(b), (vi) such Holder (and only such Holder), in its sole discretion, shall have the right to submit any dispute described in this Section 22 to any state or federal court sitting in The City of New York, Borough of Manhattan in lieu of utilizing the procedures set forth in this Section 22 and (vii) nothing in this Section 22 shall limit such Holder from obtaining any injunctive relief or other equitable remedies (including, without limitation, with respect to any matters described in Section 22(a) or Section 22(b)).

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: Upon any of the Credit Parties or any ERISA Affiliate obtaining knowledge thereof, Borrower will give written notice to Administrative Agent promptly (and in any event within two (2) Business Days) of: (i) any event or condition, including any Reportable Event, that constitutes, or might reasonably lead to, an ERISA Event; (ii) with respect to any Multiemployer Plan, the receipt of notice as prescribed in ERISA or otherwise of any withdrawal liability assessed against the Credit Parties or any of their ERISA Affiliates, or of a determination that any Multiemployer Plan is in reorganization or insolvent (both within the meaning of Title IV of ERISA); (iii) the failure to make full payment on or before the due date (including extensions) thereof of all amounts which a Credit Party or any ERISA Affiliates is required to contribute to each Plan pursuant to its terms and as required to meet the minimum funding standard set forth in ERISA and the Code with respect thereto; or (iv) any change in the funding status of any Plan that could be reasonably expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; together with a description of any such event or condition or a copy of any such notice and a statement by the principal financial officer of Borrower briefly setting forth the details regarding such event, condition, or notice, and the action, if any, which has been or is being taken or is proposed to be taken by the Credit Parties with respect thereto. Promptly upon request, a Credit Party shall furnish Administrative Agent and each of the Lenders with such additional information concerning any Plan as may be reasonably requested, including copies of each annual report/return (Form 5500 series), as well as all schedules and attachments thereto required to be filed with the Department of Labor and/or the Internal Revenue Service pursuant to ERISA and the Code, respectively, for each “plan year” (within the meaning of Section 3(39) of ERISA).

assistant: Erisa
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: way which deprives or tends to deprive an individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affects the status of an employee.” M.C.L. § 37.1202(1)(b), (c). If the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case, the burden then shifts to the defendant to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment action. If a defendant produces such evidence, the presumption is rebutted, and the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to show that the defendant’s reasons were not the true reasons, but a mere pretext for discrimination. Sniecinski v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich., 469 Mich. 124, 666 N.W.2d 186, 193 (2003) (citations omitted) (addressing claim of pregnancy discrimination); see also Hall v. McRea Corp., 238 Mich.App. 361, 605 N.W.2d 354, 359 (1999) (<HOLDING>). The plaintiffs rebuttal of the employer’s Options: A. holding that mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting approach applies to claims brought under the adea B. holding that burdenshifting analysis applies to handicap discrimination as well C. holding that the threestep mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting analysis applies to 1983 claims D. holding that the mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting framework applies to retaliation claims in the same manner as to discrimination claims E. recognizing similar analysis applies to discrimination and retaliation claims

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that burdenshifting analysis applies to handicap discrimination as well
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: chondrolysis, and as such, the manufacturer had a duty to warn of that risk. Id. at 570-71. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision, wherein it dismissed the case at the summary judgment stage based on the court’s finding that the risk of chondrolysis was not knowable at the time of plaintiffs surgery. Id. at 577. After analyzing the medical literature plaintiff presented, the Sixth Circuit held: When all is said and done, not one of Rodriguez’s thirteen articles shows that medical experts understood in 2004 that infusing a joint with bupivacaine for two days could cause irreversible cartilage damage. [The manufacturer] had no duty to understand what the relevant medical literature did not. Id. at 572 ; see also, Mack v. Stryker, 893 F.Supp.2d 976, 986-88 (D.Minn.2012) (<HOLDING>). In sum, the Sixth Circuit concluded that none Options: A. holding that the medical community did not draw a connection between pain pumps and chondrolysis or any similar injury suffered until 2005 B. holding that there must be a causal connection between the advertising activity and the injury alleged in the underlying complaint C. holding that 666 does not require any connection between the misconduct and federal funds D. holding that to show a causal connection the plaintiff must demonstrate a relationship between the misconduct and the plaintiffs injury 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 A. holding that the medical community did not draw a connection between pain pumps and chondrolysis or any similar injury suffered until 2005
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Employment Period, the Executive shall serve as the Company’s Senior Vice President, Sales & Marketing and such other positions as an officer or director of the Company and such affiliates of the Company as the Executive and the board of directors (the “ Board ”) of BakerCorp International Holdings, Inc. (“ Parent ”) shall mutually agree from time to time, and shall have the customary duties associated with such positions. The Executive shall report directly to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The principal place of employment, and principal office, shall be the Executive’s home in Lexington, Kentucky, although Executive acknowledges that a core function of his duties will require him to spend the majority of his working time traveling on Company business (e.g., visiting Company branch locations, corporate headquarters in Plano, Texas and customer locations).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No failure or delay by a party in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any right, power or privilege hereunder.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the characterization of the 1992 conviction as an “aggravated felony.” He sought a waiver of inadmissibility pursuant to former INA § 212(c) for the first, see 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1996), and cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(a) for the second. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a). The IJ held that even if Heredia was eligible for relief under former § 212(c), his 1992 conviction precluded him from seeking relief under current § 240A(a). See Rodriguez-Munoz v. Gonzales, 419 F.3d 245, 248 (3d Cir.2005). On appeal, the BIA noted that the statute under which Heredia was convicted in 1992 applies to any transfer of a controlled substance, whether payment is involved or not. See N.Y. Penal Law § 220.00(1); see also People v. Starling, 85 N.Y.2d 509, 626 N.Y.S.2d 729, 650 N.E.2d 387, 390 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Because the BIA did not have Heredia’s record Options: A. holding that in the absence of a statutory definition a term should be accorded its ordinary meaning B. holding that a judgment for attorneys fees may be rendered in the nature of child support regardless of whether the underlying action is one of enforcement or modification C. holding that a broad statutory definition of a term that was inconsistent with the terms plain meaning did not affect the terms definition in other contexts D. holding that purpose of the amendment was to clarify the definition of the word maintain E. holding that the statutory definition of the term sell conspicuously excludes any requirement that the transfer be commercial in nature or conducted for a particular type of benefit or underlying purpose

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the statutory definition of the term sell conspicuously excludes any requirement that the transfer be commercial in nature or conducted for a particular type of benefit or underlying purpose
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 parties to each assignment shall deliver to the Administrative Agent (A) a duly executed Assignment and Acceptance, (B) a processing and recordation fee of $3,500, (C) an Administrative Questionnaire unless the assignee is already a Lender and (D) the documents required under Section 2.21 .

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: agent during part of the conspiracy and therefore cannot be counted as a participant for that part, see U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 application note 1, the crime still involved the requisite number of participants for an enhancement. Furthermore, the court should have considered Andreas’ control over the foreign co-conspirators at the Irvine meeting as counting toward the minimum number of participants needed for the § 3B1.1 enhancement. A co-conspirator who used his power to guide or direct other eonspir- ators qualifies as an organizer even though his control was not absolute. See Kamoga, 177 F.3d at 621. The need to negotiate some details of the conspiracy with the cartel members also does not strip a defendant of the organizer role. See United States v. Evans, 92 F.3d 540, 545 (7th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Barnes, 993 F.2d 680, 685 Options: A. recognizing possibility that landlord had administrative claim for postpetition conversion of its property B. recognizing the possibility but denying relief C. recognizing the possibility that a defendant could have been prejudiced by the actual conduct of a codefendants defense D. holding that a sentencing court may warn a defendant of the possibility of a sentence enhancement E. recognizing possibility of collective leadership fulfilling 3b11

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing possibility of collective leadership fulfilling 3b11
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 statutory maximum for first-degree robbery. Of course, we have also recognized the inverse of “excessive sentence” cases — where a court imposes sentence below that which is prescribed by statute. See Vasquez, supra. Minimums and máximums, however, are not the only benchmarks. Indeed, merger/double jeopardy cases concern legality of sentencing, even when the sentence at issue falls within prescribed minimum and maximum sentences. See Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 604 Pa. 34, 985 A.2d 830 (2009). Consistent, then, with this Court’s jurisprudence in this area of the law throughout the years, legality of sentence issues occur generally either: (1) when a trial court’s traditional authority to use discretion in the act of sentencing is somehow affected, see e.g. In re M.W., 725 A.2d at 731 (<HOLDING>); and/or (2) when the sentence imposed is Options: A. holding that when a sentencing issue centers upon a courts statutory authority to impose a sentence rather than the courts exercise of discretion in fashioning the sentence the issue raised implicates the legality of the sentence imposed B. holding that the sentence entered by the circuit court was illegal because the court had no authority to impose a sentence that exceeded the punishment fixed by the jury C. holding that a sentence imposed for a violation of supervised release will be upheld where 1 the district court considered the applicable policy statements 2 the sentence is within the statutory maximum and 3 the sentence is reasonable D. holding that when no statutory exception applies the district court lacks the authority to impose a sentence less than the statutory mandatory minimum E. recognizing that if a guidelines error did not affect the district courts selection of the sentence imposed the sentence should be affirmed

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that when a sentencing issue centers upon a courts statutory authority to impose a sentence rather than the courts exercise of discretion in fashioning the sentence the issue raised implicates the legality of the sentence imposed
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 THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITHOUT REGARD TO CONFLICT OF LAW PRINCIPLES THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICATION OF ANY LAW OTHER THAN THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

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: order against lab-director Hilliard, preventing him from taking any adverse ac y' interest * * * if there are such rules or mutually explicit understandings that support his claim of entitlement to the benefit * * Id. at 601, 92 S.Ct. at 2699, 33 L.Ed.2d at 580. 12 . As unclassified employees, the state police "serve[ ] at the pleasure of [their] appointing authority.” Blanchette v. Stone, 591 A.2d 785, 787 (R.I.1991). Therefore, they do not receive the benefits of classified employees. 13 . The distinction between a claimant’s potential eligibility for a statutory benefit and actually qualifying to receive it for purposes of establishing a vested properly interest or contractual right in the benefit was also dis-positive in D. Corso Excavating, Inc. v. Poulin, 747 A.2d 994 (R.I.2000) (<HOLDING>) and Retired Adjunct Professors v. Almond, 690 Options: A. holding that the claims to a statutory benefit had not yet vested when the legislature eliminated the benefit B. holding that an eic was neither a social security benefit nor a local public assistance benefit C. holding that elimination of a future expected benefit that has not yet accrued does not constitute an erisa violation D. holding that it is improper for a trustee to liquidate claims that benefit only select creditors with the only benefit to the estate being the recoupment of administrative costs E. holding that a plantshutdown benefit is not an optional form of benefit

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the claims to a statutory benefit had not yet vested when the legislature eliminated the benefit
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: 723. But the Texas Legislature has stated in the Family Code that a parent’s duty to support minor children includes a duty to provide them with necessaries. See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 151.001(c). In addition, the Supreme Court of Texas and this court have concluded that a parent’s duty of support includes a duty to pay for the necessaries of the parent’s children. See In re H.V., 252 S.W.3d at 327, n. 55; In re W.J.S, 35 S.W.3d at 277-278. Under section 151.001(c) and this court’s opinion in Hardin, a trial court’s finding that attorney’s fees are necessaries for the benefit of the child supports a trial court’s order that a parent pay these fees as additional child support. See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 151.001(c); Hardin, 161 S.W.3d at 24-27; see also In re J.A.D., 2010 WL 2649961, at *4 (<HOLDING>). The only reasonable construction of section Options: A. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering that father pay attorneys fees to mother as necessaries for the benefit of the children in paternity proceeding and citing statutory predecessor to section 151001 B. holding that trial court properly assessed mothers attorneys fees as necessaries against father in case in which trial court ordered father to pay mothers attorneys fees as child support but did not state that the fees were necessaries C. holding that attorneys fees are necessaries for the criminal defense of a child D. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering that father pay attorneys fees to mother as necessaries for the benefit of the children in divorce decree and citing statutory predecessor to section 151001 E. holding in modification suit in which no enforcement was ordered that trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering father to pay mothers attorneys fees as child support under the necessaries rule

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that trial court properly assessed mothers attorneys fees as necessaries against father in case in which trial court ordered father to pay mothers attorneys fees as child support but did not state that the fees were necessaries
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 effective as of the Effective Time and shall be in effect until terminated in accordance with this Article V (the “ Term ”). This Agreement shall terminate upon the earlier to occur of (a) the last date on which either Party is obligated to provide any individual Service to the other Party in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; (b) the mutual written agreement of the Parties to terminate this Agreement in its entirety; or (c) the date that is the twenty-four (24)-month anniversary of the Distribution Date. Unless otherwise terminated pursuant to Section 5.02 , this Agreement shall terminate with respect to each Service as of the close of business on the last day of the Service Period for such Service.

assistant: Terms
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: Borrower will file all tax returns and appropriate schedules attached thereto that are required to be filed under applicable law prior to the date of delinquency. Borrower will pay, prior to delinquency, all taxes, assessments and charges or levies imposed upon them or on any of their property or which any of them is required to withhold or pay over, except where contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings with adequate security therefor having been set aside in a manner satisfactory to Lender. Borrower will pay or cause to be paid, all such taxes, assessments, charges or levies forthwith whenever foreclosure on any lien that attaches (or security therefor) appears imminent. Within seven (7) Business Days of Lender’s request therefor, Borrower will furnish Lender with copies of federal and state income tax returns filed.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: in addition , certain third parties ( such as developers of third-party content and the manufacturers of your computer , mobile phone or other devices ) may collect information about you when you use the services .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: objective medical evidence of an underlying medical condition, diffuse arthritis, prior to the expiration of Van Winkle’s insured status. The objective medical evidence does not confirm the severity of the alleged pain arising from that condition nor does the evidence show that the condition is so severe as to be expected to produce disabling pain. Further, Van Winkle’s testimony regarding his daily activities and his use of pain medication belies his claims of disabling pain. An ALJ need not fully credit subjective complaints where there is no underlying medical basis. See Fraley v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 733 F.2d 437, 440 (6th Cir.1984). Van Winkle testified he was able to perform housework during the insured period. See Bogle v. Sullivan, 998 F.2d 342, 348 (6th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). The inconsistencies in the medical and other Options: A. holding that evidence relied on by alj was insufficient to undermine pain allegations where medical records were replete with claimants reports of pain and of prescriptions B. holding that an alj may consider a claimants household activities in evaluating complaints of disabling pain C. holding that alj may not base adverse credibility finding on his perceptions of claimants pain at the hearing where record shows objective evidence of claimants pain D. holding that alj should have included complaints of pain in hypothetical question E. holding that an alj is entitled to make a credibility determination regarding the claimants subjective complaints after specifically addressing these complaints and reviewing the medical evidence in the record

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an alj may consider a claimants household activities in evaluating complaints of disabling pain
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: County, 220 F.3d 433, 446 (6th Cir.2000) (court will not accept conclusions of law or unwarranted inferences cast in the form of factual allegations.) In order to survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must provide the grounds of the entitlement to relief, which requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007). That is, “[fjactual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact).” Id. (internal citation omitted); see Association of Cleveland Fire Fighters v. City of Cleveland, 502 F.3d 545, 548 (6th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the claims set forth in a Options: A. holding that a charge of discrimination must give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiffs claim is and the grounds upon which it rests quoting conley v gibson 355 us 41 47 78 sct 99 2 led2d 80 1957 B. holding that the ninth circuit erred in granting habeas relief because the state courts decision was not an unreasonable application of strickland v washington 466 us 668 104 sct 2052 80 led2d 674 1984 C. holding uncharged acts of violence evidence of the background of the charges the parties familiarity with one another and their concert of action quoting united states v oleary 739 f2d 135 136 3d cir1984 cert denied 469 us 1107 105 sct 782 83 led2d 776 1985 cert denied 493 us 821 110 sct 78 107 led2d 44 1989 D. holding that laches dismissal is on the merits under federal rule 41 E. recognizing that the supreme court disavowed the oftquoted rule 12b6 standard of conley v gibson 355 us 41 4546 78 sct 99 2 led2d 80 1957

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that the supreme court disavowed the oftquoted rule 12b6 standard of conley v gibson 355 us 41 4546 78 sct 99 2 led2d 80 1957
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: (1) plans which are subject to ERISA; (2) plans which are subject to I.R.C. § 401(a) ; (3) plans which contain enforceable anti-alienation clau ted pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. of the Labor Code and 26 U.S.C. § 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, and must include a restriction on alienation”) 148 B.R. 930, 934 (Bankr.C.D.Cal.1992), aff'd, 163 B.R. 614 (9th Cir. BAP 1994). But see In re Hanes, in which the court did not consider “tax qualification” as in Hall, Sirois, and Witwer, stating: “[W]e conclude for purposes of § 541(c)(2), a plan is ‘qualified’ under ERISA if it is (1) governed by ERISA and (2) includes a non-alienation provision that is (3) enforceable under ERISA.” 162 B.R. 733, 740 (Bankr.E.D.Va.1994). See also In re Kaplan, 162 B.R. 684, 691 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1993) (<HOLDING>). I find the best view to be that a plan is Options: A. holding that state law relates to an employee benefit plan and is therefore preempted by erisa if it has a connection with or reference to such a plan B. holding that a plan is qualified if it complies with erisa and the irc C. holding that it is not necessary to ascertain whether a plan is tax qualified but only that it is covered by erisa D. holding that the relevant question is not whether risk is involved or assumed but rather whether that or something else to which it is related in the particular plan is its principal object and purpose E. holding that it is not

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that it is not necessary to ascertain whether a plan is tax qualified but only that it is covered by erisa
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: Tenant expressly waives, to the extent allowed by law, any claims under federal, state or other law that Tenant might otherwise have against Landlord relating to the condition of such Property or the Premises or the Leasehold Improvements or personal property located thereon or the presence in or contamination of the Property or the Premises by hazardous materials. Tenant agrees to indemnify and hold Indemnitees (as defined in Section 16) harmless from and against and to reimburse Indemnitees with respect to, any and all claims, demands, causes of action, loss, damage, liabilities, costs and expenses (including attorneys’ fees and court costs) of any and every kind or character, known or unknown, fixed or contingent, asserted against or incurred by Landlord at any time and from time-to-time by reason of or arising out of the breach by Tenant of any representation or covenant contained in Section 20.A above.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: case, Plaintiffs statistical evidence is insufficiently tailored to support his individual claims. Plaintiffs statistics compare the promotion rate of employees within the same pay grade who perform similar job functions; however, these statistics generally fail to compare similarly situated individuals, significantly diminishing the probative value of any disparity. For example, Plaintiffs statistics do not account for differences in the type or level of the employees’ applied skills, both of which are highly related to hiring decisions. Plaintiff does not provide statistics comparing employees with equivalent work experience in specific job categories or job progressions, or outcomes for those employees, both black and white, who had actually applied for posted positions Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); cf. James v. Stockholm Valves & Fittings Co., Options: A. holding the plaintiff failed to make a prima facie case that the defendants failure to promote him was discriminatory where the plaintiff failed to that show he was qualified for the relevant position B. holding reliance on statistical evidence of inexorable zero was sufficient to establish prima facie case notwithstanding plaintiffs failure to reference appropriate workpool C. holding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation because there was no evidence that the decisionmaker knew of the plaintiffs protected conduct D. holding that summary judgment was appropriate where plaintiffs statistical evidence which lacked specific analytical foundation and thus failed to show that employer maintained discriminatory intent was insufficient to establish prima facie case or pretext E. holding that plaintiffs statistical evidence failed to establish prima facie case or pretext where evidence failed to make specific analytical comparisons

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that plaintiffs statistical evidence failed to establish prima facie case or pretext where evidence failed to make specific analytical comparisons
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: ALEXION shall indemnify SINHA subject to and in accordance with the terms of the Indemnification Agreement, which survives SINHA's separation from ALEXION and remains in full force and effect.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: right of way is to be made by” the federal land management agency.having authority over the lands in question. 848 F.2d at 1085. For the agency to be able to make that determination, Garfield County needs to communicate its plans to the Park Service in a meaningful fashion, and in turn, the Park Service has a duty to evaluate those plans and make the initial determination contemplated by Hodel in a timely and expeditious manner. If the County disagrees with the agency’s decision, it may appeal or seek judicial review. ... Id. at 1243-44 (footnote omitted). Although Garfield County involved an R.S. 2477 right of way within a National Park, we see no reason why consultation of this sort is not equally required with respect to R.S. 2477 routes across BLM land. Cf. Clouser, 42 F.3d at 1538 (<HOLDING>). The principle that the easement holder must Options: A. holding that regardless whether the trails in question are public highways under rs 2477 they are nonetheless subject to the forest service regulations B. recognizing that the forest service supervisor had authority to issue orders pursuant to 36 cfr 26150 C. holding under basic principles of property law that easement rights are subject to regulation by the forest service as the owner of the servient estate D. holding that national forest service had authority to forbid opening rs 2477 routes to motorized travel E. holding in suit under the administrative procedure act challenging us forest service approval of forest development plan that injury to aesthetic conservational or recreational interests is sufficient to confer standing

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that national forest service had authority to forbid opening rs 2477 routes to motorized travel
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as to matters of federal law, the Plan and the rights of all Persons claiming hereunder shall be construed and determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware without giving effect to conflicts of laws principles thereof.

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: former section 212(c) was repealed by IIRIRA in September 1996). Section 212(c) has been interpreted by the BIA “to authorize a n evaluating subjective intent, including the alien’s family ties, property holdings, business affiliations in the United States as well as the alien’s family, property and business in the foreign country. See Singh v. Reno, 113 F.3d 1512, 1514-15 (9th Cir.1997) (“[A]n alien’s desire to retain his status as a permanent resident, without more, is not sufficient; his actions must support his professed interest.”). The court has to determine whether the alien had “an intent to depart in a manner which can be regarded as meaningfully interruptive of the alien’s permanent residence.” Rosenberg v. Fleuti, 374 U.S. 449, 461, 83 S.Ct. 1804, 10 L.Ed.2d 1000 (1963) (<HOLDING>). ■ ■ Courts have noted that “[conclusions Options: A. holding that defendants status as a deportable alien could be considered by the district court at sentencing B. holding that an innocent casual and brief excursion by a resident alien outside the countrys borders for four hours may not be considered a departure disruptive of his resident alien status C. holding that departure based on deportable alien status was prohibited D. holding that adjustment of status was permitted even if deportable alien had entered the country as a lawful permanent resident E. holding that the phrase resident alien means an alien lawfully residing in the united states

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an innocent casual and brief excursion by a resident alien outside the countrys borders for four hours may not be considered a departure disruptive of his resident alien status
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to the marijuana being grown in those patches. He also insists that a reasonable fact finder could only conclude that, in accompanying Lewis to the area of the marijuana patches on the morning of their arrests, his purpose was innocent: to simply help Lewis retrieve his ATV, just as any father would help his son. Unfortunately for Larry, however, “[cjircumstantial evidence sufficient to support a conspiracy conviction need not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, provided the summation of the evidence permits a conclusion of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” Burgos, 94 F.3d at 858. And “a variety of conduct,” apart from personally manufacturing or possessing the drugs in issue, “can constitute participation in a conspiracy sufficient to sustain a conviction.” Id. at 859 (<HOLDING>). Here, an agreement between Larry and Lewis to Options: A. holding the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it may find the defendant guilty if the jury found the defendant had conspired with the two coconspirators named in the indictment or both of them or others where evidence tended to show a conspiracy between the defendant and some person other than the named coconspirators B. holding that district court erred in finding that shooting was not reasonable foreseeable merely because the coconspirators had agreed not to discharge their firearms C. holding that evidence was sufficient for jury to find that the defendant participated in the conspiracy even though he did not have a relationship with all of his fellow coconspirators D. recognizing that participation may assume a myriad of forms such as supplying firearms or purchasing money orders for coconspirators or permitting them to store narcotics and other contraband in ones home or purchasing plane tickets for coconspirators internal citations omitted E. holding that no independent inquiry into reliability is required when the evidence falls within a firmly rooted hearsay exception like that for coconspirators under rule 801d2e internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing that participation may assume a myriad of forms such as supplying firearms or purchasing money orders for coconspirators or permitting them to store narcotics and other contraband in ones home or purchasing plane tickets for coconspirators internal citations omitted