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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: any excess expenses caused because of their unreasonable or vexatious conduct. See In re Volpert, 110 F.3d 494, 500-01 (7th Cir. 1997). 9 . The FDCPA provides a definition of "debt”: The term "debt” means any obligation or alleged obligation of a consumer to pay money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, whether or not such obligation has ' been reduced to judgment. 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5). 10 . Because the parties have not presented the issue, we express no opinion as to whether a FDCPA claim can ever be predicated on a previous filing in a bankruptcy proceeding. Cf. Kokoszka v. Belford, 417 V.S. 642, 650-52, 94 S.Ct. 2431, 41 L.Ed.2d 374 (1974) Options: A. holding that bankruptcy court is without jurisdiction to control disposition of chapter 13 debtors property that is not property of the bankruptcy estate unless the property is related to the bankruptcy proceedings of the code B. holding the broad jurisdictional grant given the bankruptcy courts under the 1978 bankruptcy act unconstitutional C. holding that the wage garnishment protections of the consumer credit protection act sought to prevent persons from entering bankruptcy in the first place and therefore were not applicable when bankruptcy did occur D. holding that the purpose of the bankruptcy codes avoidance provisions is to prevent a debtor from making transfers that diminish the bankruptcy estate to the detriment of creditors E. 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

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the wage garnishment protections of the consumer credit protection act sought to prevent persons from entering bankruptcy in the first place and therefore were not applicable when bankruptcy did occur
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you are solely responsible for any harm resulting from your disclosure , or authorization of the disclosure , of your password or from any person 's use of your password to gain access to your account or account name .

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: and (b)(1)(C). His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the district court should not have applied a career-offender enhancement because to do so it had to determine, in violation of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), that Owens’s prior convictions were crimes of violence or controlled-substance offenses; counsel concedes, however, that Owens explicitly admitted to career-offender status in his plea agreement. Owens has filed a pro se supplemental brief and a “Summary of Arguments,” arguing that his plea was not knowing and voluntary in light of Blakely. Counsel’s argument fails. See United States v. Lucca, 377 F.3d 927, 934 (8th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); cf. United States v. Nolan, 397 F.3d 665, 667 Options: A. holding that blakely was not implicated where defendant was sentenced based solely upon facts admitted as part of guilty plea B. holding that a defendants guilty plea was unconditional where the guilty plea was not in writing and the government did not consent to it being conditional C. holding that when the defendant admitted that he pleaded guilty for reasons other than to have the judge who took his plea sentence him the defendant could properly be sentenced by a different judge D. holding that trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider defendants motion to withdraw guilty plea filed beyond term of court in which defendant was sentenced E. holding that defendant was entitled to withdraw guilty plea upon habeas corpus proceedings where he pled guilty in exchange for an illegal sentence

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that blakely was not implicated where defendant was sentenced based solely upon facts admitted as part of guilty plea
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: entitled to the same full faith and credit as any other judgment. Delahanty v. First Pennsylvania Bk., N.A., 318 Pa. Super. 90, 139-40, 464 A.2d 1243 (1983); Schlossberg v. Citizens Bank, 341 Md. 650, 655, 672 A.2d 625 (1996). Although a judgment by confession is subject to being, vacated, opened, or modified, it is essentially a final judgment entitled to recognition the same as other judgments. Boyce v. Plitt, 274 Md. 333, 335 A.2d 101 (1975). Pennsylvania has consistently noted that a meaningful difference exists between a confessed judgment which is opened and a confessed judgment which is stricken. Under longstanding Pennsylvania law, an opened confession of judgment remains a judgment until it is tried on its merits. Adams v. James L. Leeds Co., 189 Pa. 544, 547, 42 A. 195 (1899) (<HOLDING>); Markofski et ux. v. Yanks, 297 Pa. 74, 78, Options: A. holding that in considering the appellants opposition to the motion for a default judgment it is proper to apply the rule 55c standard for setting aside the entry of a default B. holding that the trial court in entering judgment affirming an earlier judgment for an award of attorney fees after having discovered that it mistakenly entered the earlier judgment before the expiration of time for the filing of objections had the inherent power under orcp 71 cs modification authority to change the effective date of the judgment without vacating or setting aside the judgment C. holding on appeal the judgment of the lower court is presumed to be correct and the burden is on the appellant to present to us a sufficient record from which we can determine whether the lower court has erred in the respect complained of D. holding the lower court properly opened the confessed judgment but erred in setting aside the executions and the attachments stated plaintiff is fairly entitled to this security pending the proceedings upon the opened judgment unless security equivalent to it and approved by the court is substituted for it E. holding that a judgment is subject to collateral attack where the judgment is void for want of jurisdiction with respect to the power of the court to render the particular judgment or decree as where the court exceeds the powers conferred on it by constitutional or statutory provisions

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the lower court properly opened the confessed judgment but erred in setting aside the executions and the attachments stated plaintiff is fairly entitled to this security pending the proceedings upon the opened judgment unless security equivalent to it and approved by the court is substituted for it
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: seize ammunition boxes that contained linked ammunition rounds or large-capacity magazines. See Doc. 63, Ex. I (authorizing search for “a large capacity feeding device that consists of ammunition, linked together by belt and links”). Based on his testimony that the green ammunition box was empty, Ex. C at 157, Plaintiffs contention seems to be that the box was outside the scope of the warrant because it did not contain any ammunition or magazines, though nowhere does he clearly articulate such an argument. Regardless of whether a reasonable juror would credit such a “hyper-technical” interpretation of the warrant, it is also the case that the “plain view” exception allowed the seizure of the ammunition box as probative evidence. Cf. Walczyk v. Rio, 496 F.3d 139, 160 n. 21 (2d Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Cooper, 19 F.3d 1154, 1163 Options: A. holding warrant was overbroad when probable cause existed to search for a pistol but warrant permitted search and seizure of all firearms and ammunition B. holding that there was no fourth amendment seizure where delivery of package was not delayed because it is the extent of the interference with the defendants possessory interest in the property that determines whether a seizure has occurred C. holding seizure of evidence in plain view reasonable under fourth amendment D. holding that a seizure was lawful under the plain view doctrine where there was probable cause to associate the property with criminal activity E. holding that seizure of ammunition gun clips and related firearm paraphernalia was permitted under plainview doctrine where warrant simply authorized seizure of firearms

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that seizure of ammunition gun clips and related firearm paraphernalia was permitted under plainview doctrine where warrant simply authorized seizure of firearms
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: did not successfully make the shot. The Entry Form Rules provided, “By participating in this sweepstakes, entrants agree to abide by and be bound by these official rules and the decisions of the judges which are final in all matters relating to this sweepstakes.” By submitting the application containing the Entry Form Rules, Mr. Giunto agreed to abide by the decision of the judges. Other jurisdictions have held that “when a contestant agrees to be bound by the decisions of a tournament director or an awards committee, such decisions are final and binding on contestants absent fraud, gross mistake, or lack of good faith.” National Amateur Bowlers, Inc. v. Tassos, 715 F.Supp. 323, 325 (D.Kan.1989) (citation omitted); Ahrens v. McDaniel, 287 S.C. 63, 336 S.E.2d 505, 506 (Ct.App.1985)(<HOLDING>); Johnson v. New York Daily News, 97 A.D.2d Options: A. holding that bad faith includes lack of good faith in investigating the facts of a complaint B. holding that while the creditor has the initial burden to produce some evidence of lack of good faith the ultimate burden is on the debtor to prove his good faith C. holding that this courts review of board decisions is limited to final orders or final decisions D. holding that the decisions of the independent judging organization would be final unless there has been a fraud intentional or gross mistake irregularity or lack of good faith E. holding that decisions of the tournament committee would be final unless there was fraud intentional or gross mistake or lack of good faith

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that decisions of the tournament committee would be final unless there was fraud intentional or gross mistake or lack of good faith
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a general policy matter, federal courts favor arbitration. Lewis v. Epic Sys. Corp., 823 F.3d 1147, 1159 (7th Cir. 2016) (“The [Federal Arbitration Act] contains a general policy favoring arbitration and a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements.”) (internal quotation omitted). But that general preference yields to explicit contrary contractual language. As we explained in Andermann v. Sprint Spectrum L.P., the “federal policy favoring arbitration” was originally formulated to simply “make clear, as had seemed necessary because of judges’ historical hostility to arbitration, that arbitration was no longer to be disfavored.” 785 F.3d 1157, 1159 (7th Cir. 2015). For unambiguous contracts, however, the agreement, as reflected by the document’s explicit terms, controls. Id. (<HOLDING>); see also Granite Rock Co. v. Int’l Bhd. of Options: A. holding that a court must respect the parties disputeresolution preferences as embodied in an arbitration clause B. holding that in ruling on a motion to compel arbitration a court must consider 1 whether the parties have entered into a valid arbitration agreement 2 whether an arbitrable issue exists and 3 whether the right to arbitration has been waived C. holding an entire arbitration clause is void and arbitration cannot be compelled where contract contained unconscionable clause and has a nonseverability clause D. holding parties to an exculpatory clause where the parties intent is clear E. holding that the best way to harmonize a choice of law clause and an arbitration clause is to apply the substantive case law of the named state to the entire agreement including the arbitration clause

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a court must respect the parties disputeresolution preferences as embodied in an arbitration clause
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 Administrative Agent shall have received evidence of insurance coverage in form, scope, and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Administrative Agent and otherwise in compliance with the terms of Section 6.6 hereof. The Administrative Agent or its designee shall have completed a satisfactory review of such insurance coverage and related documentation. The Borrower shall have delivered to the Administrative Agent a description of all insurance maintained by or on behalf of the Loan Parties and their Subsidiaries as of the Closing Date.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the filing of the Certificate of Designations with the Registrar of Corporations, the execution, delivery and performance of the Transaction Documents by the Company and the issuance and sale of the Securities will not (i) conflict with or result in a breach or violation of (a) any of the terms and provisions of, or constitute a default under the Company’s Second Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, as amended, or the Company’s Amended and Restated Bylaws, both as in effect on the date hereof (true and complete copies of which have been made available to the Investors through the EDGAR system), or (b) any statute, rule, regulation or order of any governmental agency or body or any court, domestic or foreign, having jurisdiction over the Company, any Subsidiary of the Company or any of their respective assets or properties, except, with respect to subclause (i)(b), as which have not had and would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, individually or in the aggregate, or (ii) conflict with, or constitute a default (or an event that with notice or lapse of time or both would become a default) under, result in the creation of any lien, encumbrance or other adverse claim upon any of the properties or assets of the Company or any Subsidiary of the Company or give to others any rights of termination, amendment, acceleration or cancellation (with or without notice, lapse of time or both) of, any Material Contract, except as which have not had and would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, individually or in the aggregate.

assistant: No Conflicts
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: municipal advisors and municipal advisor professionals are not contributing and soliciting. Although Leatherwood and Wein-gartner never clearly refer to the 2016 Amendments, there is one occasion in which Pipkin appears to refer to the 2016 Amendments. However, this reference fails to establish standing for different reasons. Pipkin states that he “expect[s] that the expanded coverage of the MSRB’s Political Contribution Rule will now cause more individuals to ,.. refrain from contributing.” Id. ¶ 10 (Pet’rs’ App’x at 313). Even assuming that “the expanded coverage of the MSRB’s Political Contribution Rule” refers to the 2016 Amendments, “[s]uch ‘some day* intentions” are precisely ■ the sort of speculation that does not establish standing. See Lujan, 504 U.S. at 564, 112 S.Ct. 2130 (<HOLDING>). Rather, Pipkin must attest that the Options: A. holding that the affiants profession of an tent to return to the places they had visited beforewhere they will presumably this time be deprived of the opportunity to observe animals of the endangered speciesis simply not enough to establish standing B. holding that defendants had no standing where they conceded that they did not own the automobile searched and were simply passengers the owner of the car had been the driver of the vehicle at the time of the search C. holding that the affiants profession of an intent to return to the places they had visited before is simply not enough because such some day intentions without any description of concrete plans or indeed any specification of when the some day will be do not support a finding of the actual or imminent injury that our cases require emphasis in original D. holding that defendants failed to raise triable issue of material fact where they did not establish that the type size of the copy they submitted in opposition to summary judgment motion was identical to that of the original contract E. holding officers did not have a realistic opportunity to intervene because they were not present at the time of the shooting

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the affiants profession of an tent to return to the places they had visited beforewhere they will presumably this time be deprived of the opportunity to observe animals of the endangered speciesis simply not enough to establish standing
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: For all purposes of this Agreement, all communications, including without limitation notices, consents, requests or approvals, required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when hand delivered or dispatched by electronic facsimile transmission (with receipt thereof orally confirmed), or five business days after having been mailed by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid or one business day after having been sent for next-day delivery by a nationally recognized overnight courier service, addressed to the Company (to the attention of the Secretary of the Company) and to Indemnitee at the applicable address shown on the signature page hereto, or to such other address as any party may have furnished to the other in writing and in accordance herewith, except that notices of changes of address will be effective only upon receipt.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a plaintiff must show that he suffered a violation of a constitutional right and that the violation was committed under color of state law. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983; Hadges v. Yonkers Racing Corporation, 918 F.2d 1079, 1081 (2d Cir.1990). Traditionally, a defendant must have exercised power “possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law for its conduct to constitute state action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 49, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). Accordingly, a private entity’s conduct may become so entwined with governmental policies, or so impregnated with a governmental character as to become subject to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Kia P. v. McIntyre, 235 F.3d 749, 755-57 (2d Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court has articulated two tests Options: A. holding that a private plaintiff may not being an action under the family educational rights and privacy act of 1974 because that statute does not create personal rights to enforce under 42 usc 1983 B. holding that a state is not a person under 42 usc 1983 C. holding that a municipality may be held liable as a person under 1983 D. holding that person in 42 usc 1983 does not include states E. holding that to the extent that private hospital acted in furtherance of a child welfare statute and not medical considerations it may be held liable under 42 usc 1983

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that to the extent that private hospital acted in furtherance of a child welfare statute and not medical considerations it may be held liable under 42 usc 1983
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Antonio 2000, no pet. h.)(op. on reh’g). Appellant did not direct the trial court to any specific evidence to raise an issue of material fact on the element of causation as to the Professional defendants. Likewise, he does not direct this Court to any evidence that would allow us to conclude that he has raised an issue of material fact as to causation. Appellant attached some 500 pages of depositions and other evidence in support of his response to motions for summary judgment. He did not specify which were intended to show the element of causation on the part of the Professional defendants. Neither this Court nor the trial court were obligated to sift through a record of this size to find Appellant’s evidence for him. See Rogers v. Ricane Enterprises, Inc., 772 S.W.2d 76, 81 (Tex.1989)(<HOLDING>). We hold that final summary judgment was Options: A. holding that general references to a voluminous record do not direct trial courts and parties to evidence on which the movant relies B. holding that the court should make factual findings from the record evidence as if it were conducting a trial on the record C. holding that appellate courts lack jurisdiction on direct appeal to review a trial courts refusal to hold an individual in contempt D. holding that where both the appellate and trial courts are reviewing the paper record there is no reason for the appellate courts to defer to the trial courts finding 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 A. holding that general references to a voluminous record do not direct trial courts and parties to evidence on which the movant relies
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 Option granted under the Plan shall be evidenced by an Award Agreement, which agreement need not be the same for each Participant. Each Option so granted shall be subject to the conditions set forth in this Section 7, and to such other conditions not inconsistent with the Plan as may be reflected in the applicable Award Agreement. All Options granted under the Plan shall be Nonqualified Stock Options unless the applicable Award Agreement expressly states that the Option is intended to be an Incentive Stock Option. Incentive Stock Options shall be granted only to Eligible Persons who are employees of a member of the Company Group, and no Incentive Stock Option shall be granted to any Eligible Person who is ineligible to receive an Incentive Stock Option under the Code. No Option shall be treated as an Incentive Stock Option unless the Plan has been approved by the stockholders of the Company in a manner intended to comply with the stockholder approval requirements of Section 422(b)(l) of the Code, provided that any Option intended to be an Incentive Stock Option shall not fail to be effective solely on account of a failure to obtain such approval, but rather such Option shall be treated as a Nonqualified Stock Option unless and until such approval is obtained. In the case of an Incentive Stock Option, the terms and conditions of such grant shall be subject to, and comply with, such rules as may be prescribed by Section 422 of the Code. If for any reason an Option intended to be an Incentive Stock Option (or any portion thereof) shall not qualify as an Incentive Stock Option, then, to the extent of such nonqualification, such Option or portion thereof shall be regarded as a Nonqualified Stock Option appropriately granted under the Plan.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The authorized capital stock of the Company as of the First Closing will be as set forth in the Company’s SEC Filings (as defined below). All issued and outstanding shares of capital stock have been duly authorized and validly issued, are fully paid and nonassessable, were not issued in violation of any preemptive rights or similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities, and, except as disclosed in the SEC Filings, have been issued and sold in compliance with the registration requirements of federal and state securities laws or the applicable statutes of limitation have expired. Except as set forth herein or in the SEC Filings, there are no (i) outstanding rights (including, without limitation, preemptive rights), warrants or options to acquire, or instruments convertible into or exchangeable for, any unissued shares of capital stock or other equity interest in the Company, or any contract, commitment, agreement, understanding or arrangement of any kind to which the Company or its subsidiaries is a party and relating to the issuance or sale of any capital stock or convertible or exchangeable security of the Company; (ii) outstanding debt securities; (iii) agreements or arrangements under which the Company is obligated to register the sale of any of its securities under the Securities Act; or (iv) obligations of the Company to purchase redeem or otherwise acquire any of its outstanding capital stock or any interest therein or to pay any dividend or make any other distribution in respect thereof. The Company makes no representation or warranty as to the applicability to this Offering of the anti-dilution protection provisions contained in the transaction documents for the Company’s July 2014 private placement offering. The Notes are (and the Registrable Shares if and when issued, will be) free and clear of all pledges, liens, encumbrances and other restrictions (other than those arising under applicable securities laws as a result of the issuance of the Notes). No co-sale right, right of first refusal or other similar right exists with respect to the Notes (or the Registrable Shares) or the issuance and sale thereof.

assistant: Capitalization
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: Cause all assessments and taxes, whether real, personal, or otherwise, due or payable by, or imposed, levied, or assessed against Borrower or any of its assets to be indefeasibly paid in full, before delinquency or before the expiration of any extension period, except to the extent that the validity of such assessment or tax shall be the subject of a Permitted Protest.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: must file a statement that the defendant understands the admonitions and is aware of the consequences of his plea. Tex.Code Ceim.ProcANN. art. 26.13(d). Substantial compliance by the court with the admonishment statute is sufficient. Tex.Code Crim. ProoANN. art. 26.13(c) (Vernon 1989). When the record shows that the defendant received an admonishment on punishment, there is prima facie showing that the plea was know- mg and voluntary. Ex parte Williams, 704 S.W.2d at 775. There is no requirement that the trial court orally inquire about specific issues of voluntariness after the defendant and his counsel have both admitted on the record, without objection by the defendant, that the defendant filed such written documents and that he understood them. See Rodriguez, 850 S.W.2d at 607 (<HOLDING>). In the aggravated robbery cause, the Options: A. holding that where a criminal defendant has voluntarily and knowingly entered into a plea agreement in which he or she waives the right to appeal the defendant is not entitled to resentencing in light of booker B. holding that the defendants guilty plea was entered into knowingly voluntarily and intelligently C. holding that at resentencing the district court was entitled to assume that the waiver was still in effect and was not required to again advise defendant of his right to counsel where defendant had waived counsel at the plea stage D. holding that the trial court was entitled to rely upon contents of written admonishments and statements in which both defendant and his counsel averred that defendants plea was freely and voluntarily made E. holding employer was entitled to rely and act upon the written advice from the employees physician

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the trial court was entitled to rely upon contents of written admonishments and statements in which both defendant and his counsel averred that defendants plea was freely and voluntarily made
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes and cancels any other agreement, representation or communication, whether oral or in writing, between the parties relating to the Award, provided that the Agreement shall be at all times subject to the Plan.

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: The Borrower will, and will cause each of its Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect its legal existence and the rights, qualifications, licenses, permits, privileges, franchises, governmental authorizations and intellectual property rights material to the conduct of its business, and maintain all requisite authority to conduct its business in each jurisdiction in which its business is conducted, except where the failure to do so could not reasonably be expected to result in a Material Adverse Effect; provided that the foregoing shall not prohibit any merger, consolidation, liquidation or dissolution permitted under Section 6.03 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Jose Ramirez Hernandez and his wife, Luis Josefina Ramos, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of their application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review. Petitioners’ sole contention on appeal is that they received ineffective assistance of counsel. We lack jurisdiction over the petitioners’ ineffective assistance of counsel claim because they did not exhaust their administrative remedies by first raising it to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677 (9th Cir.2004) (explaining that exhaustion is jurisdictional); Ontiveros-Lopez v. INS, 213 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. *** This Options: A. holding that the petitioner must exhaust administrative remedies by first presenting ineffective assistance of counsel claim to the bia B. holding that a plaintiff need not exhaust his administrative remedies to bring a retaliation claim C. recognizing a constitutional claim for ineffective assistance of counsel D. holding that the petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with regard to his claim involving a procedural error correctable by the bia E. holding that claims not presented to the ij and bia should be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the petitioner must exhaust administrative remedies by first presenting ineffective assistance of counsel claim to the bia
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 court had to reset the hearing for June 28, 2010. See Exs. 1.098 & 17. 92 . Ex. 1.098. 93 . Ex.2. 94 . See Exs.I & K. 95 . Ex. 3. 96 . Ex. 4. 97 . Ex. 5. 98 . Ex. 3 at 1538-49. 99 . Ex. 1.094. 100 . Ex. 1.102. 101 . Ex. 1.102. 102 . Ex. 1.121. 103 . Ex. 10 at 1661-64. 104 . Ex. 1.125. On January 9, 2012, Respondent proposed a payment plan of $500.00 per month. 105 . See Exs. 1.126 & 1.129. 106 . Ex. 1.129 at 1288. 107 . Ex. 1.129 at 1290. 108 . Ex. 1.130; Ex. 1.147. 109 . Compl. 105; Answer 105. 110 . The People's claims encompass Respondent's statements about his tax returns from 2006 through 2008, but we determine the People have not proved that Respondent made any misrepresentations regarding his 2008 tax returns. We find that it was not clear which years wer 31, 52 (Okla.2004) (<HOLDING>). 114 . See Black's Law Dictionary 271 (8th Options: A. holding that defendant could be charged for making false statements to treasury officials under the tax evasion statute or the statute prohibiting false statements to government officials B. holding that false statements are constitutionally protected C. holding that false arrest and false imprisonment claim were not duplicative D. holding that an attorney who made false representations to a court did not violate okla rpc 33 because that rule addresses professional misconduct as an advocate for making false statements to a tribunal not false statements by a lawyer as a witness E. holding that rule does not apply where defendant made false representations

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an attorney who made false representations to a court did not violate okla rpc 33 because that rule addresses professional misconduct as an advocate for making false statements to a tribunal not false statements by a lawyer as a witness
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 Parent and the Borrower will maintain in effect and enforce policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance by the Parent, the Borrower, its Subsidiaries and their respective directors, officers, employees and agents with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions.

assistant: Sanctions
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: Any provision of this Incremental Amendment held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability without affecting the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof; and the invalidity of a particular provision in a particular jurisdiction shall not invalidate such provision in any other jurisdiction.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: category of crimes involving moral turpitude rather than acts that are "base, vile, or depraved." Id. 2 . The majority relies on Chen v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir.2008) and United States v. Macias-Valencia, 510 F.3d 1012 (9th Cir.2007) for the principle that a subsequent panel is not bound by statements in prior decisions relating to an issue that had not been “presented for review,” but neither case supports that principle. In both cases, the prior decision in question had acknowledged that its passing remarks were not precedential. See Chen, 524 F.3d at 1033 (“We acknowledged, however, that [our observation in He v. Gonzales, 501 F.3d 1128 (9th Cir.2007) about the potential relief available to the petitioners] was not before us.”); see also Macias-Valencia, 510 F.3d at 1015 (<HOLDING>). Here, the Navarro-Lopez en banc panel Options: A. holding that our use of the subjunctive in mentioning an argument in passing suggests that we knew that we were not addressing and that we could not address that argument B. holding that where a party does not adequately brief an argument we need not address it on appeal C. holding where one argument is dispositive of the appeal we need not address the defendants remaining arguments D. recognizing that we may not substitute our judgment for that of the alj E. holding that where one argument is dispositive of the appeal we need not address the defendants other arguments

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that our use of the subjunctive in mentioning an argument in passing suggests that we knew that we were not addressing and that we could not address that argument
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: disciplinary penalty when he was deprived of the right to earn good-time credits, contravenes the federal and state constitutions. In my view, appellant was deprived of a liberty interest. When a claimant asserts that government action has wrongly deprived him of a liberty interest and the claim is fact intensive, a hearing to develop the factual basis of the claim is a necessary part of the review guaranteed by due process. Id. at 557-58, 94 S.Ct. 2963 (“This analysis as to liberty parallels the accepted due process analysis as to property. The Court has consistently held that some kind of hearing is required at some time before a person is finally deprived of his property interests.”); see also Kurschner v. City of Camden Planning Comm’n, 376 S.C. 165, 171, 656 S.E.2d 346, 350 (2008) (<HOLDING>). Thus, if a hearing is required to develop the Options: A. recognizing that due process requires a trialtype hearing for factspecific adjudicatory decisions by administrative agencies B. holding that due process requires a hearing appropriate to the nature of the case C. recognizing that administrative agencies lack to power to consider or determine constitutional issues D. holding that where state rules of civil procedure apply to courts of the state they do not apply to adjudicatory proceedings before state agencies E. recognizing that administrative agencies are not bound by rules of evidence

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that due process requires a trialtype hearing for factspecific adjudicatory decisions by administrative agencies
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: verdict. Therefore, under Webb, a court would not inquire as to whether improperly admitted other-acts evidence affected the outcome of the case, and yet precluding a jury from considering whether a defendant acted in conformity with a prior bad act is precisely the purpose of excluding evidence under Evid.R. 404(B). State v. Nichols, 10th Dist. Franklin No. 97APA09-1162, 1998 WL 226430, *3 (May 5, 1998) (the risk of other-acts evidence is that the jury will use it to “infer character and conformity therewith”). Therefore, instead of relying on Webb, I would look to the federal nonconstitutional harmless-error standard of review as set out in Kotteakos, 328 U.S. 750, 66 S.Ct. 1239, 90 L.Ed. 1557. See United States v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438, 446, 106 S.Ct. 725, 88 L.Ed.2d 814 (1986), fn. 9 (<HOLDING>). {¶ 67} In Kotteakos, the issue was “whether Options: A. holding that the constitutionally improper denial of a defendants opportunity to impeach a witness for bias like other confrontation clause errors is subject to chapman harmlesserror analysis B. holding that courts may review nonconstitutional claims C. holding that the omission of an element from the jury charge is subject to harmlesserror review D. recognizing that harmlesserror analysis applies to britt violations E. recognizing that kotteakos sets out the harmlesserror standard for nonconstitutional errors

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that kotteakos sets out the harmlesserror standard for nonconstitutional errors
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: fee.” (Emphasis added.) This is a fundamental distinction as a denial of fees under a discretionary rule cannot eliminate a statutory mandate. Thus, we hold that this Court’s summary denial of Austin’s request for attorney’s fees under Rule 222 was not dispositive of his right to seek statutory fees in the circuit court. Moreover, this conclusion is consistent with our jurisprudence interpreting Rule 222 wherein our appellate courts have found that a decision under this rule does not preempt an award of attorney’s fees to which one is otherwise entitled, i.e., statutorily authorized. See Taylor v. Medenica, 332 S.C. 324, 504 S.E.2d 590 (1998) (awarding Respondents a $1,000 attorneys’ fee and $81.66 for costs as allowed by Rule 222 and holding that Respondents co E.2d 793 (2004) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we find the Court’s denial of Options: A. recognizing in a partition action that whether respondents were entitled to appellate attorneys fees pursuant to section 1561110 was a determination for the circuit court B. holding trial court erred in awarding attorneys fees to physicians in absence of any evidence of attorneys fees C. holding that a public administrator was not entitled to attorneys fees in a claim against the estate of a former guardian where the case was not one where attorneys fees were authorized and there was no evidence to support the award D. holding that an award of attorneys fees under supreme court rule 38 precursor to rule 222 did not preempt an award of attorneys fees to which one is otherwise entitled and thus appellant could seek an award of attorneys fees pursuant to section 1577300 which permits an award of fees for a party prevailing in an action against a state agency E. holding that appellate court should reverse and remand issue of attorneys fees where damages are reduced on appeal in a manner that could affect the determination of reasonable and necessary attorneys fees

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing in a partition action that whether respondents were entitled to appellate attorneys fees pursuant to section 1561110 was a determination for the circuit court
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 district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. III. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment on Perez’s due process and First Amendment retaliation claims. 1 . In addition, the district court held that the defendants waived any right to qualified immunity by failing to invoke immunity timely. The defendants do not contest this finding on appeal. 2 . The parties do not dispute that Perez's employment contract with the UHA provided him with a valid property interest. 3 . Although he contends that he had no opportunity to request a name-clearing hearing, there is no requirement that the name-clearing hearing occur before termination. Rosenstein v. City of Dallas, 876 F.2d 392, 396 n. 8 (5th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, Perez had ample opportunity to Options: A. holding that in an agreement of sale in which time was of the essence and tender of deeds and of purchase money were expressly waived waiver of time is of the essence of the agreement would not result from a failure to tender because the parties had agreed that neither tender of deed nor tender of purchase money was required to put the other in default B. holding that no constitutional violation may occur if a procedurally proper nameclearing hearing is provided C. holding that an evidentiary hearing is not required prior to the termination of social security disability benefits D. holding that a traffic ticket that required a plaintiff to appear at hearing and answer to charges was not a seizure E. holding that the state is not required to tender a nameclearing hearing prior to disclosing the charges or discharging the employee

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the state is not required to tender a nameclearing hearing prior to disclosing the charges or discharging the employee