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 Company will not permit anyone to exercise this Option if the issuance of shares at that time would violate any law or regulation, including without limitation all applicable state, federal and foreign laws and regulations and all applicable requirements of any stock exchange or automated quotation system on which the Company’s Common Stock may be listed or quoted at the time of such issuance or transfer. The Shares issued pursuant to this Agreement shall be endorsed with appropriate legends, if any, determined by the Company.

assistant: Compliance With 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: It is axiomatic, however, that states act through their officials and agencies. Thus, under Will, those state agencies and other political subdivisions which carry out the state’s business and have immunity from lawsuits under the Eleventh Amendment constitute “arms of the state.” Pursuant to Will, such entities would not be considered persons under § 1983. Those political subdivisions which are not provided immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, do not rise to the level of “arms of the state” and would, under Will, be considered to be persons for the purposes of § 1983. See Barket, Levy & Fine v. St. Louis Thermal Energy Corp., 948 F.2d 1084, 1086-88 (8th Cir.1991) (bi-state agency is a “person” under § 1983); Magula v. Broward Gen. Medical Ctr., 742 F.Supp. 645, 649 (S.D.Fla.1990) (<HOLDING>). Since the Will decision was handed down, a Options: A. holding that a county is not an arm of the state for purposes of the eleventh amendment B. holding that an ohio school district is more like a county or city than it is like an arm of the state and therefore it is not entitled to assert eleventh amendment immunity from suit C. holding that the anne arundel board of education is an arm of the state for purposes of eleventh amendment immunity D. holding that the puc is not an arm of the state and rejecting claim of immunity E. holding that because hospital district is more like a municipality than an arm of the state hospital district did not have eleventh amendment immunity

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that because hospital district is more like a municipality than an arm of the state hospital district did not have eleventh amendment immunity
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 Employer may withhold from any amounts payable or benefits to be provided to the Executive under this Employment Agreement or otherwise all Federal, state, city or other taxes and other amounts that the Employer may reasonably determine are required to be withheld pursuant to any applicable law or regulation.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: doubt. First, although Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones provided a fact-based narrative of their conversations with the defendants and their trip from El Paso to Albuquerque, their testimony ultimately was not essential to the Government’s case. The other evidence presented by the Government — which included video and audio surveillance as well as agent testimony — was enough to secure a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Brown, 482 F.2d 1226, 1229 (8th Cir.1973) (affirming cross-examination limitations in part because “even if the credibility of the witness was [further] impugned, the Government’s case in chief did not rest upon the credibility of this witness alone”); cf. Olden v. Kentucky, 488 U.S. 227, 238, 109 S.Ct. 480, 102 L.Ed.2d 513 (1988) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Second, much of Mr. Smith and Mr. Jones’s Options: A. holding that a confrontation clause violation constituted harmless error B. holding that testimony at trial in violation of defendants constitutional confrontation right was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the testimony was cumulative C. holding that the sixth amendment confrontation clause violation in that case was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore did not require the conviction to be overturned D. holding that confrontation clause violation was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in part because it concerned the limitation of crossexamination of the prosecutions key witness E. holding confrontation clause violation was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and thus upholding firstdegree murder conviction

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that confrontation clause violation was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in part because it concerned the limitation of crossexamination of the prosecutions key 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to the question presented. Where the error is prejudicial, the defendant is entitled to have his motion reconsidered and passed upon as a discretionary matter.’ ” Johnson, 346 N.C. at 124, 484 S.E.2d at 376 (quoting State v. Lang, 301 N.C. 508, 510, 272 S.E.2d 123, 125 (1980)); see also Barrow, 350 N.C. at 646, 517 S.E.2d at 378. Here, the trial court instructed the jury, without objection from the parties, as follows: As to the second question, members of the jury, it is your duty to recall the evidence as the evidence was presented. So you may retire and resume your deliberation. From these instructions, we are convinced that the trial judge did not impermissibly deny the request based solely on the unavailability of the transcript. See Barrow, 350 N.C. at 648, 517 S.E.2d at 378-79 (<HOLDING>); State v. Ashe, 314 N.C. 28, 35, 331 S.E.2d Options: A. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to accept the defendants guilty pleas to two counts of the indictment and stating that even if the trial court erred the error had not prejudiced the defendant because he was found guilty by the jury of the charges to which he intended to plead and the evidence of the other crimes would have been admissible in the trial for the first degree murder charge B. holding that the trial court failed to exercise its discretion in merely stating that the request could not be granted because there was no transcript at this point C. holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a transcript of a recording even though defense counsel did not stipulate to its accuracy D. holding that appellant failed to preserve error because it did not present appellate complaint to trial court E. holding that the trial court failed to exercise its discretion by stating that it did not have the ability to present the transcript to the jury

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the trial court failed to exercise its discretion by stating that it did not have the ability to present the transcript to the jury
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 Loan Party will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted Subsidiaries to create, incur, assume, or suffer to exist, directly or indirectly, any Lien on or with respect to any of its assets, of any kind, whether now owned or hereafter acquired, or any income or profits therefrom, except for Permitted Liens.

assistant: Liens
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 contains all of the understandings between the parties hereto pertaining to the matters referred to herein, and supersedes all undertakings and agreements, whether oral or in writing, previously entered into by them with respect thereto. The Employee represents that, in executing this Agreement, he does not rely and has not relied upon any representation or statement not set forth herein made by the Company with regard to the subject matter of this Agreement or otherwise.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: (emphasis added) (citing Jansen v. Hilo Packing Co., 202 Misc. 900, 118 N.Y.S.2d 162 (S.Ct.1952)); (“Where defendant inserted a picture of a motion picture actress using a certain camera, with an inscription beneath it giving her name, in a manual for the use of such camera, she was permitted a recovery.”) (emphasis added) (citing Selsman v. Universal Photo Books, Inc., 18 A.D.2d 151, 238 N.Y.S.2d 686 (App.Div.1963)). To the extent that Palmer involved the unauthorized use of professional golfers’ names and playing records in the defendant’s board games, the court acknowledges that Palmer has certain factual similarities to the matter under consideration, but with the critical exception that the defendant in Palmer used golfers’ pictures; ther s’ Ass’n, 95 F.3d 959, 968 (10th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>) ; Toney v. L’Oreal USA 406 F.3d 905, 910 (7th Options: A. holding that trading drugs for a firearm constituted use under 924c1a B. holding that the right of publicity is descendible C. holding that the defendants use of players likenesses in parody trading cards violated the right of publicity D. holding that the defendants use of a models likeness in connection with the packaging and promotion of its hair care product violated the right of publicity E. holding that a change of venue was not warranted due to publicity surrounding an unrelated murder with common features because the defendant failed to establish any specific prejudice against him as a result of the publicity

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the defendants use of players likenesses in parody trading cards violated the right of publicity
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: Schedule 6.21(a) sets forth, as of the date hereof, all of the Subsidiaries of REIT, the form and jurisdiction of organization of each of the Subsidiaries, and REIT’s direct and indirect ownership interests therein. Schedule 6.21(b) sets forth, as of the date hereof, all of the Unconsolidated Affiliates of REIT and its Subsidiaries, the form and jurisdiction of organization of each of the Unconsolidated Affiliates, REIT’s or its Subsidiary’s ownership interest therein and the other owners of the applicable Unconsolidated Affiliate. No Person owns any legal, equitable or beneficial interest in any of the Persons set forth on Schedules 6.21(a) and 6.21(b) except as set forth on such Schedules.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: official action generally turns on the ‘objective legal reasonableness’ of the action, assessed in light of the legal rules that were ‘clearly established’ at the time the action was taken.” Anderson, 483 U.S. at 635, 107 S.Ct. 3034. That is, “[t]he relevant question ... is the objective question whether a reasonable officer could have believed [the conduct at issue] to be lawful, in light of clearly established law and the information the [officer who engaged in the conduct at issue] possessed.” Id. at 636, 107 S.Ct. 3034; see also Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201, 121 S.Ct. 2151, 150 L.Ed.2d 272 (2001) (setting forth two-step analysis for resolving government officials’ qualified immunity claims); but see Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 227, 129 S.Ct. 808, 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (<HOLDING>). Parties dispute the level of generality at Options: A. holding that an appellate court has discretion to consider an issue not argued by the parties B. holding that twostep saucier analysis should not be regarded as an inflexible requirement but that a court may consider the steps as the court deems appropriate in its discretion C. holding that the court has discretion not to consider an issue abandoned on appeal D. holding that the court may only consider the discrete acts that occurred within the appropriate time period E. holding that unless remand from the bia is qualified or limited to a specific purpose an ij may consider any and all matters he deems appropriate in the exercise of his administrative discretion or which are brought to his attention in compliance with the appropriate regulations

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that twostep saucier analysis should not be regarded as an inflexible requirement but that a court may consider the steps as the court deems appropriate in its discretion
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 other Loan Documents represent the entire agreement of each of the Loan Parties party hereto and thereto, the Administrative Agent and the Lenders with respect to the subject matter hereof, and there are no promises, undertakings, representations or warranties by any of the Loan Parties party hereto, the Administrative Agent or any Lender relative to the subject matter hereof not expressly set forth or referred to herein or in the other Loan Documents, as applicable.

assistant: Integration
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: I see HTC’s consistent, separate presentation with respect to claim 1 and claim 24 and HTC’s reliance on the same argument that it had presented to the Board as sufficient to provide “fair notice to the initial tribunal and to the opposing party.” Maj. Op. 984. This is simply a situation in which the appellant has made a single and overly broad argument — that a separate diverting unit is not required — for both the method claims and the device claims. In my view, this argument is correct as to the method claims and incorrect as to the device claims. Under these circumstances, I see no forfeiture. In similar circumstances in the past, we have held that the appellant wins in part and loses in part. See, e.g., Perricone v. Medicis Pharm. Corp., 432 F.3d 1368, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (<HOLDING>); Ecolochem, Inc. v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 227 Options: A. holding that a priorart reference anticipated claims 14 and 7 but not claims 8 9 and 13 because the latter set of claims contained one fewer limitation B. holding that certain claims could not be a class issue in part because the complaint did not mention the claims C. holding claimant did not have to segregate fees between fraud and contract claims because both claims were based on the same set of facts and circumstances D. holding that claim preclusion applies to small claims court adjudication and that judicial economy is not served by encouraging resolution of property claims in small claims court and other claims in district court E. holding that the public harm requirement applies to fraudulent inducement claims because the fraud claims arise from related contract claims

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a priorart reference anticipated claims 14 and 7 but not claims 8 9 and 13 because the latter set of claims contained one fewer limitation
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: Employee agrees to make him/herself available to cooperate fully with Employer, its parents and affiliates and their legal counsel in any pending or future legal proceedings or investigatory matters involving issues in which Employee was involved during his/her employment with Employer.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: of state law. (Doc. 168 at 157). Consequently, Plaintiffs contend that in this case, the funeral directors are more analogous to the hypothetical insurance salesperson in Walker, because the FDL forces cremation customers to interact with a funeral director who will not be the individual performing the cremation. (Id. at 157-58). As to the third element, they argue that Defendants present no evidence of consumer harm from contracting for cremation services directly with cemeteries and crematories. (Doc. 140 at 172). On the other hand, Plaintiffs highlight that Defendants have not provided any evidence that requiring consumers to purchase cremation services directly from licensed funeral directors prevents consumer harm. (Id. (citing Edenfield, 507 U.S. at 770-71, 113 S.Ct. 1792 (<HOLDING>))). Concerning the fourth element, Plaintiffs Options: A. holding that a state must demonstrate that its restriction will in fact alleviate the harms to a material degree B. holding that danger must justify the degree of interference imposed C. holding that petitioner must demonstrate it is more likely than not that he will be tortured upon his return D. holding that inmates must demonstrate an actual injury E. holding that a defendant must demonstrate a knowing waiver

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a state must demonstrate that its restriction will in fact alleviate the harms to a material degree
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: Debtor is the sole owner or has other rights in all of the Collateral, free and clear of all Liens, charges and claims (including infringement claims with respect to patents, trademarks, service marks, copyrights and the like), other than Permitted Liens.

assistant: Liens
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: 118, 124 (V.I. 2009). Therefore, this Court’s general practice of not considering a moot appeal on the merits is not jurisdictional, but an exercise of judicial restraint that, as with other judicially-created doctrines, is subject to waiver. See Nini v. Mercer County Cmty. Coll., 202 N.J. 98, 995 A.2d 1094, 1105 (N.J. 2010) (explaining that, because New Jersey constitution does not limit New Jersey Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to actual cases and controversies, requiremen 2006) (allowing appeal from finding of child neglect, even though full custody later restored, because neglect finding “could have adverse consequences” in future custody proceedings and “may detrimentally impact societal and interpersonal relationships”); Smith v. Smith, 145 N.C. App. 434, 549 S.E.2d 912, 914 (2001) (<HOLDING>); Wilder v. Perna, 174 Ohio App. 3d 586, 883 Options: A. holding that once the sentence imposed for a conviction has completely expired the collateral consequences of that conviction are not themselves sufficient to render an individual in custody for the purposes of a habeas attack upon it B. holding appeal from abuse prevention order not moot due to orders expiration because of collateral consequences including effect in future proceedings and stigma C. holding expired domestic violence restraining order not moot because of collateral legal consequences such as consideration in custody determination and nonlegal collateral consequences such as reputational harm D. holding drivers license revocation was not moot because collateral consequences of revocation may be substantial including higher insurance rates and adverse employment consequences E. holding that an attorney is required to advise a defendant of the direct consequences of a plea and will not be found ineffective for failing to advise of collateral consequences of the plea

assistant: The best answer is C. holding expired domestic violence restraining order not moot because of collateral legal consequences such as consideration in custody determination and nonlegal collateral consequences such as reputational harm
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the intent of the decedent changed before death and the decedent by written order informed the financial institution of this change.” In re Estate of Banko, 622 N.E.2d at 480. The statements shed no light on Helbling’s intent at the time she and Decker created the joint accounts, and, as noted above, the Siblings and the Estate have produced no evidence that Helbling notified the financial institution in writing of an intent to deny Decker a right to survivorship. Accordingly, even if the trial court erred in striking Avery’s affidavit and a paragraph of Glen Cornell’s affidavit, admission of the statements in question would not have affected any party’s rights in this case, and the error was harmless. See, e.g., Parke County v. Ropak, Inc., 526 N.E.2d 732, 740-741 (Ind.Ct.App.1988) (<HOLDING>), trans. denied. The Siblings and the Estate Options: A. holding that even if the trial court erred in excluding a letter from evidence that fell within an exception to the hearsay rule the error was harmless where admission of the letter would not have had a substantial effect on a partys rights B. holding doctors letter is inadmissible hearsay C. holding that the admission of evidence under an exception to the hearsay rule is reviewed for abuse of discretion D. holding letter from specialist to treating physician fell within business entry exception to the hearsay rule E. holding that a violation of the hearsay rule was harmless

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that even if the trial court erred in excluding a letter from evidence that fell within an exception to the hearsay rule the error was harmless where admission of the letter would not have had a substantial effect on a partys rights
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 Lender may at any time, without the consent of, or notice to, the Loan Parties or the Administrative Agent, sell participations to any Person (other than a natural person, or a holding company, investment vehicle or trust for, or owned and operated for the primary benefit of a natural person, a Defaulting Lender or the Loan Parties or any of the Loan Parties’ Affiliates or Subsidiaries) (each, a “ Participant ”) in all or a portion of such Lender’s rights and/or obligations under this Agreement (including all or a portion of its Commitment and/or the Loans (including such Lender’s participations in LC Obligations and/or Swing Line Loans) owing to it); provided , that (i) such Lender’s obligations under this Agreement shall remain unchanged, (ii) such Lender shall remain solely responsible to the other parties hereto for the performance of such obligations and (iii) the Loan Parties, the Agents, the Lenders and the LC Issuer shall continue to deal solely and directly with such Lender in connection with such Lender’s rights and obligations under this Agreement. Any Participant shall agree in writing to comply with all confidentiality obligations set forth in Section 10.07 as if such Participant was a Lender hereunder. For the avoidance of doubt, each Lender shall be responsible for the indemnity under Section 10.04(c) without regard to the existence of any participation.

assistant: Participations
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 previously disclosed by Company in a filing with the Commission, there is no Action which would reasonably be expected to adversely affect or challenge the legality, validity or enforceability of any of this Amendment or the sale, issuance, listing, trading or resale of any Shares on the Trading Market hereunder. The Commission has not issued any stop order or other order suspending the effectiveness of any registration statement filed by Company or any Subsidiary under the Exchange Act or the Act.

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: final determination of the appropriate action to be taken in each case. In so doing, we will accord careful consideration the findings of fact and recommendations of the Commission, or its committee, which has had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses. In re Anderson, 412 So.2d at 746. ¶40. What remains unclear is what consideration, if any, we give to findings of fact and recommended sanctions reached by agreement. Compare Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Williams, 880 So.2d 343, 347 (Miss.2004) (“Although there are unanswered questions regarding the mitigating facts in this case, we accept the recommendation before us, because it comes to us as an agreed recommendation.”) with Miss. Comm’n on Judicial Performance v. Sanford, 941 So.2d 209, 217-18 (Miss.2006) (<HOLDING>). Even though our rules do not contemplate Options: A. holding that a joint recommendation is akin to a criminal defendant entering into a plea agreement with the prosecution whereby the defendant agrees to plead guilty to the offense in return for the prosecutions promise of a specific recommended sentence to the judge for consideration B. holding that the government must be held to a promise made to a defendant during plea negotiations if that promise induced the defendants guilty plea C. holding that the defendant is not entitled to be sentenced by the judge who took his plea when the judge made no promise to sentence him D. holding that the constitution does not require the government to disclose impeachment evidence prior to entering a plea agreement with a criminal defendant E. holding that a defendant must have knowledge of the likely consequences of entering the guilty plea in order for a plea to be voluntary and knowing

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a joint recommendation is akin to a criminal defendant entering into a plea agreement with the prosecution whereby the defendant agrees to plead guilty to the offense in return for the prosecutions promise of a specific recommended sentence to the judge for consideration
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 with respect to the Borrower and its subsidiaries, (x) audited consolidated balance sheets and related consolidated statements of income, shareholder’s equity and cash flows for 2017 and 2018, and (y) unaudited consolidated balance sheets and related consolidated statements of income and cash flows for each interim Fiscal Quarter ended since the last audited financial statements for which financial statements are available.

assistant: Financial Statements
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: Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 156.401. In other chapters of the Family Code, the Legislature has stated that (1) the trial court may order a parent to support a child in the manner specified in the order, with exceptions not applicable to the case under review; and (2) a parent’s duty to support minor children includes a duty to provide the children with necessaries. See id. §§ 151.001, 154.001. These sections apply in modification actions, even though they are not found in Chapter 156. See, e.g„ In re A.L.E., 279 S.W.3d 424, 431 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, no pet.) (applying section 153.001 to modification suit under Chapter 156); Stanfield v. Stanfield, No. 01-05-00379-CV, 2005 WL 345 sal Dist., No. 14-09-00891-CV, 351 S.W.3d 381, 385-387 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); Perry & Perry Builders, Inc. v. Galvan, No. Options: A. holding that the warden expressly waived the exhaustion requirement because her counsels conduct during the district court proceedings manifested a clear and unambiguous intent to waive the requirement B. holding that the legislature imposed a requirement implicitly rather than by means of statutory language expressly stating the requirement C. holding that section 890041 is not a jurisdictional requirement rather a requirement to maintain suit D. holding that the court assumes the legislature acquiesced in our interpretation of the language because the legislature had not amended the language E. holding the statutory notification requirement unenforceable

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the legislature imposed a requirement implicitly rather than by means of statutory language expressly stating the requirement
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 has not found any case in which a court has considered whether an internet search is “other paper” as contemplated by 28 U.S.C. 1446(b), it is not beyond the realm of possibility that, in this digital age, an internet search could be “other paper.” “Other paper is [after all] a broad term and includes any relevant information received by Defendants.” Chavez v. Kincaid, 15 F.Supp.2d 1118, 1123 (D.C.N.M.1998) (citing Yarnevic v. Brink’s, Inc., 102 F.3d 753, 755 (4th Cir. 1996)). Moreover, “other paper” as contemplated by § 1446(b) “is not restricted solely to papers filed in [a] case.” Sunburst Bank v. Summit Acceptance Corp., 878 F.Supp. 77, 81 (S.D.Miss.1995). Nor must “other paper” be paper. See, e.g., Trotter v. Steadman Motors, Inc., 47 F.Supp.2d 791, 793 (S.D.Miss.1999) (<HOLDING>). In the case sub judi-ce, the information Options: A. holding that a deposition that was not presented to the trial court could not be considered on appeal B. holding that deposition testimony may constitute other paper C. holding that selfserving deposition testimony standing alone is insufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment D. holding if a deposition is taken for discovery only not for use at trial the deposition is not a stage of trial for which the defendant must be present E. holding that admission of one defendants deposition was proper where she was present at the deposition even though she was represented at the time by the same counsel as her codefendants

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that deposition testimony may constitute other paper
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 Borrowers will use Letters of Credit, Revolver Loans and Swingline Loans (a) on the Restatement Date, to finance a portion of the Specified Transactions and for working capital needs and other general corporate purposes of the Lead Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries and (b) after the Restatement Date, for working capital needs and other general corporate purposes of the Lead Borrower and its Restricted Subsidiaries, including the financing of Capital Expenditures, Permitted Acquisitions, other Permitted Investments, Permitted Restricted Payments and any other purpose not prohibited by this Agreement.

assistant: Use Of Proceeds
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: that state courts should generally follow the twists and turns in federal law would be ironic in light of the congressional intent to allow, if not encourage, state experimentation. G. A Note on Law of the Case, Stare Decisis, and Dictum. If one looks through our ICRA cases, federal cases are often simply cited for propositions of law without substantive discussion. Often times in this setting, we were simply restating legal principles that the parties were not contesting in the case. When a legal principle is embraced by the parties by agreement and is not contested on appeal, the court’s subsequent recitation of the legal principle is not a holding in the case that was a product of an adversary proceeding. See Berger v. Gen. United Grp., Inc., 268 N.W.2d 630, 635 (Iowa 1978) (<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Hemingway, 734 F.3d Options: A. holding that the coordinate jurisdiction rule and all its attendant meanings and limitations expressed in previous case law would be assumed into law of the case doctrine B. holding that because plaintiffs assumed delaware law was properly pled and proven by defendants we would consider delaware law but stressed that this case was not precedent for ignoring our rules of pleading and proof on foreign law C. holding that a party relying on foreign law must plead and prove it and partys failure to do so entitles court to assume that foreign law is the same as forum law D. holding that delaware law controlled delaware corporations capacity to sue or be sued E. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that because plaintiffs assumed delaware law was properly pled and proven by defendants we would consider delaware law but stressed that this case was not precedent for ignoring our rules of pleading and proof on foreign law
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: 863 (Alaska App.2006). [34] 34. Crawford, 100 P.3d at 441 (quoting Elstad, 470 U.S. at 310-11, 105 S.Ct. at 1294) (alteration in. Crawford). 35 . Elstad, 470 U.S. at 311, 105 S.Ct. at 1294 (quoting Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 486, 83 S.Ct. 407, 416, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963)). 36 . 903 P.2d 1090 (Alaska App.1995). [37] 37. Id. at 1098 (citations omitted). 38 . Id. at 1099 n. 4 (citing United States v. Knight, 395 F.2d 971, 975 (2nd Cir.1968)). 39 . Id. at 1098. 40 . See Moreau v. State, 588 P.2d 275, 279-80 & n. 13 (Alaska 1978); Longley v. State, 776 P.2d 339, 343-44 (Alaska App.1989). 41 . See Munson v. State, 123 P.3d 1042, 1048 (Alaska 2005) (citing Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452, 459, 114 S.Ct. 2350, 129 L.Ed.2d 362 (1994)). 42 . See Berghuis, 130 S.Ct. at 2259-60 (<HOLDING>); State v. Bailey, 714 S.W.2d 590, 593 Options: A. recognizing that davis was concerned only with the right to counsel and not the right to remain silent B. holding that a suspect who wants to invoke his or her right to remain silent must do so unambiguously C. holding that during police interrogation right to remain silent must be invoked unambiguously D. holding that police may continue questioning a suspect until he unambiguously invokes his right to remain silent E. holding that an accused must unambiguously invoke the right to remain silent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that an accused must unambiguously invoke the right to remain silent
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 Employer shall pay to the Executive a base salary (the “ Base Salary ”) at the rate of no less than $295,000 per calendar year, less applicable deductions, and prorated for any partial year. Beginning with the first quarter of 2020, the Base Salary shall be reviewed for increase by the Employer no less frequently than annually, and shall be increased in the discretion of the Employer and any such adjusted Base Salary shall constitute the “Base Salary” for purposes of this Agreement. The Base Salary shall be paid in substantially equal installments in accordance with the Employer’s regular payroll procedures. The Executive’s Base Salary may not be decreased during the Employment Period.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Executive agrees that if his employment as Secretary and General Counsel of P&W is terminated on or before May 31, 2017 (the "Contract Termination Date"), Executive agrees to provide such reasonable services as may be requested of him, from time to time, by the President and/or General Counsel of P&W subject to the terms and conditions hereof.

assistant: Employment
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: is whether there was a viable defense,” and instructing courts to “consider the totality of the circumstances” “in determining whether a reasonable probability exists that the defendant would have insisted on going to trial”). For the foregoing reasons, we hold that Middleton has established prejudice, in satisfaction of Strickland, by showing lins, 985 So.2d 985, 992 (Fla.2008), that the guarantee against double jeopardy protects against a second prosecution for the same offense after an acquittal. Here, due to the structural defect in the trial, no verdict was rendered; therefore, no acquittal on the capital charge occurred. An 11-person jury cannot reach a legitimate verdict in a capital case, absent a waiver by the defendant. See Williams v. State, 792 So.2d 1207, 1210 (Fla.2001) (<HOLDING>). Although Williams was not decided at the time Options: A. holding that the late substitution of an alternate juror was not prejudicial to defendant because the district court had carefully instructed the alternate not to discuss the case before dismissing her and upon recall the alternate twice affirmed that she had complied with the courts instruction B. holding that the district courts dismissal of a juror after five weeks of deliberations violated the defendants right to a unanimous jury because the record evidence suggested the juror found the evidence insufficient for a conviction C. holding a new trial required when juror is replaced by an alternate during jury deliberations D. holding that a lottery system for selecting alternate jurors immediately prior to deliberations was harmless error E. holding that rule 606b precludes any inquiry into the validity of the verdict based on juror testimony regarding racial or ethnic comments made during the course of deliberations but that the rule against juror impeachment cannot be applied so inflexibly as to bar juror testimony in those rare and grave cases where claims of racial or ethnic bias during jury deliberations implicate a defendants right to due process and an impartial jury internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding a new trial required when juror is replaced by an alternate during jury deliberations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: skype reserves the right to change the terms related to skype numbers and/or skype to go numbers , including without limitation to impose or amend any residency requirements and/or require the provision of further user information for continued access to such numbers .

assistant: Unilateral change
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: Client is solvent, able to pay its debts as they mature, has capital sufficient to carry on its business and all businesses in which it is about to engage and the fair saleable value of its assets (calculated on a going concern basis) is in excess of the amount of its liabilities.

assistant: Solvency
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 Third Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts and the parties may deliver their respective signatures by electronic mail or PDF transmission, all of which together shall be deemed to constitute one instrument, and each of which shall be deemed an original.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: circulation. 458 U.S. at 759 n. 10, 102 S.Ct. 3348. These emotional and reputational harms are severe enough to render laws criminalizing the possession of child pornography constitutional in the interest of “stamp[ing] out this vice at all levels in the distribution chain.” Osborne v. Ohio, 495 U.S. 103, 109-11, 110 S.Ct. 1691, 109 L.Ed.2d 98 (1990) (noting that most of the child pornography industry is underground). The underlying inquiry is whether an image of child pornography implicates the interests of an actual minor. See, e.g., United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285, 289, 128 S.Ct. 1830, 170 L.Ed.2d 650 (2008) (“the child-protection rationale for speech restriction does not apply to materials produced without children”); Free Speech Coal., 535 U.S. at 258, 122 S.Ct. 1389 (<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court has stated, albeit in Options: A. holding that the first amendment does not protect obscenity or pornography produced with actual children B. holding that private possession of child pornography is not protected by the first amendment C. holding that the language of the ohio statute prohibits only images depicting actual children and thus does not violate the first amendment D. holding that virtual child pornography which did not use images of actual minors was protected expressive speech under the first amendment because it did not harm any real children through its production and continued existence E. holding that pornography depicting actual children can be prescribed whether or not the images are obscene because of the states interest in protecting the children exploited by the production process

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that virtual child pornography which did not use images of actual minors was protected expressive speech under the first amendment because it did not harm any real children through its production and continued 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each of the Parties hereto shall hold and cause its directors, officers, employees, advisors and consultants to hold in strict confidence, unless compelled to disclose by judicial or administrative process or, in the opinion of its counsel, by other requirements of law, all information (other than any such information relating solely to the business or affairs of such party) concerning the other Party hereto furnished it by such other Party or its representatives pursuant to this Agreement (except to the extent that such information can be shown to have been (1) in the public domain through no fault of such Party or (2) later lawfully acquired from other sources not under a duty of confidentiality by the party to which it was furnished), and no Party shall release or disclose such information to any other Person, except its directors, officers, employees, auditors, attorneys, financial advisors, bankers or other consultants who shall be advised of and agree to be bound by the provisions of this Section 8.15 . Each of the Parties hereto shall be deemed to have satisfied its obligation to hold confidential information concerning or supplied by the other Party if it exercises the same care as it takes to preserve confidentiality for its own similar information. Except as required by law or with the prior written consent of the other Party, all Tax Returns, documents, schedules, work papers and similar items and all information contained therein, and any other information that is obtained by a Party or any of its Affiliates pursuant to this Agreement, shall be kept confidential by such Party and its Affiliates and representatives, shall not be disclosed to any other Person and shall be used only for the purposes provided herein. If a Party or any of its Affiliates is required by law to disclose any such information, such Party shall give written notice to the other Party prior to making such disclosure.

assistant: Confidentiality
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: There is no pending or, to the best knowledge of the Company, threatened action, suit, proceeding or investigation before any court, governmental agency or body, or arbitrator having jurisdiction over the Company, or any of its Affiliates that would affect the execution by the Company or the performance by the Company of its obligations under the Transaction Documents to which it is a party. Except as disclosed Schedule 4(g) to the Schedule of Exceptions or as disclosed in the Latest SEC Documents (as defined in Section 4(h)), there is no pending or, to the best knowledge of the Company, basis for or threatened action, suit, proceeding or investigation before any court, governmental agency or body, or arbitrator having jurisdiction over the Company, or any of its Affiliates which litigation if adversely determined would have or be reasonably likely to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Litigations