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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 382 U.S. 204 86 S.Ct. 396 15 L.Ed.2d 270 Aaron SOLOMONv.SOUTH CAROLINA. No. 588. Appeal from the Supreme Court of South Carolina. Ellis Lyons, for appellant. Daniel R. McLeod, Atty. Gen. of South Carolina, and E. N. Brandon, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee. Dec. 6, 1965. PER CURIAM. 1 The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. 2 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS is of the opinion that the judgment should be reversed on the authority of Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398, 83 S.Ct. 1790, 10 L.Ed.2d 965. And see McGowan v. State of Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 561, 577, 81 S.Ct. 1101, 1218, 1226, 6 L.Ed.2d 393 (dissenting opinion). 3 Mr. Justice BRENNAN and Mr. Justice STEWART are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

assistant: 3
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To request the issuance of a Letter of Credit (or the amendment, renewal or extension of an outstanding Letter of Credit), the Borrower shall hand deliver or telecopy (or transmit by electronic communication, if arrangements for doing so have been approved by the applicable Issuing Bank) to the Issuing Bank which is being requested to issue (or issued, in the case of an amendment, renewal or extension) the Letter of Credit and the Administrative Agent (reasonably in advance of the requested date of issuance, amendment, renewal or extension, but in any event no later than 11:00 a.m., New York City time, on the date three (3) Business Days in advance or such shorter period as the applicable Issuing Bank shall agree to) a notice requesting the issuance of a Letter of Credit, or identifying the Letter of Credit to be amended, renewed or extended, and specifying the date of issuance, amendment, renewal or extension (which shall be a Business Day), the identity of the Issuing Bank selected by the Borrower to issue such Letter of Credit, the date on which such Letter of Credit is to expire (which shall comply with paragraph (c) of this Section), the amount of such Letter of Credit, the name and address of the beneficiary thereof and such other information as shall be necessary to prepare, amend, renew or extend such Letter of Credit. If requested by the applicable Issuing Bank, the Borrower also shall submit a letter of credit application on the applicable Issuing Bank’s standard form in connection with any request for a Letter of Credit. A Letter of Credit shall be issued, amended, renewed or extended only if (and upon issuance, amendment, renewal or extension of each Letter of Credit the Borrower shall be deemed to represent and warrant that), after giving effect to such issuance, amendment, renewal or extension (i) the LC Exposure shall not exceed $50,000,000, (ii) the sum of the total Revolving Credit Exposures shall not exceed the total Revolving Commitments, (iii) the LC Issuing Bank Exposure of any Issuing Bank shall not exceed its ratable share of the $50,000,000 Letter of Credit sublimit, unless agreed in writing by such Issuing Bank and (iv) the sum of the total Revolving Credit Exposure of such Issuing Bank exceeding the amount of such Issuing Bank’s then Revolving Commitment.

assistant: Amendments
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: at 58-59, 589 A.2d at 850. Rather, § 807 codifies the injury-in-fact and actual-case-or-controversy requirements of standing. Consequently, plaintiffs must still demonstrate “a personal injury traceable to the defendant’s conduct that the court can remedy by granting the sought-after relief.” Brigham v. State, 2005 VT 105, ¶ 16, 179 Vt. 525, 889 A.2d 715 (mem.). ¶ 8. Vermont courts are vested with subject matter jurisdiction only over actual cases or controversies involving litigants with adverse interests. Agency of Natural Res. v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 173 Vt. 302, 306, 796 A.2d 476, 479 (2001). To have a case or controversy subject to the jurisdiction of the court, the plaintiffs must have standing. See Hinesburg Sand & Gravel Co. v. State, 166 Vt. 337, 341, 693 A.2d 1045, 1047 (1997) (<HOLDING>). In the absence of standing, any judicial Options: A. holding that one purpose of separation of powers doctrine is to safeguard litigants right to have claim decided before judge free from potential domination by other branches of government citations omitted B. recognizing that standing doctrine is fundamentally rooted in respect for the separation of powers of the independent branches of government C. recognizing that the judicial rewriting of a statute would violate the separation of powers doctrine D. recognizing separation of powers doctrine E. holding that the presidential privilege is inextricably rooted in the separation of powers under the constitution

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that standing doctrine is fundamentally rooted in respect for the separation of powers of the independent branches of government
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: sanitary landfill or other facility for the disposal, treatment or storage of nonhazardous solid waste without a permit from the Director.” Code § 10.1-1408.1(A). No permit for a new solid waste management facility shall be issued until the Director [of the Department] has determined, after investigation and evaluation of comments by the local government, that the proposed facility poses no substantial present or potential danger to human health or the environment. The Department shall hold a public hearing within the said county, city or town prior to the issuance of any such permit for the management of nonhazardous solid waste. Code § 10.1-1408.1(D) (emphasis added). See also Concerned Taxpayers of Brunswick County v. County of Brunswick, 249 Va. 320, 328, 455 S.E.2d 712, 716 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Any permit issued by the Director “shall Options: A. holding that determining compliance with the acts provisions is the function of the director who issues the permit required for the operation of a sanitary landfill or other like facility after determining that the proposed facility poses no substantial danger to human health or the environment B. holding that the reasonableness inquiry is based upon the totality of the circumstances in determining whether or not a search was reasonable C. holding that the critical element in determining whether the provisions of the norrislaguardia act apply is whether the employeremployee relationship is the matrix of the controversy D. holding that in determining the manageability of a proposed antitrust class action the district court must consider proof of damages E. holding that the proper focus when determining the starting point of the limitations period is upon the time of the discriminatory acts not upon the time at which the consequences of the acts became most painful

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that determining compliance with the acts provisions is the function of the director who issues the permit required for the operation of a sanitary landfill or other like facility after determining that the proposed facility poses no substantial danger to human health or the environment
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: if , after making a reasonable effort , you and oculus are not able to agree upon an arbitration forum or arbitrator , aaa or a court having proper jurisdiction will appoint an arbitration forum or arbitrator .

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: v. Callahan, 125 F.3d 1436, 1441 (11th Cir.1997), that does not mean it is improper for the ALJ to consider a claimant’s daily activities at all, see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529(c)(3)(i), 416.929(c)(3)(i) (specifically listing the claimant’s daily activities as one of the factors to consider in evaluating the claimant’s symptoms). The ALJ, when evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms, can also consider such things as: (1) the nature, location, onset, duration, frequency, radiation, and intensity of pain and other symptoms; (2) precipitating and aggravating factors; (3) adverse side-effects of medications, and (4) treatment or measures taken by the claimant for relief of symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3)(i) — (iv); see also Swindle v. Sullivan, 914 F.2d 222, 226 (11th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s Options: A. holding that the burden of proof is on the claimant B. holding that an aljs determination on side effects was proper where the claimant did not complain about side effects nor did the record disclose any concerns about side effects by the doctors examining the claimant C. holding that a defendants antitrust liability depends on the overall effects of a defendants conduct in the relevant market D. holding claimant suffered permanent total disability where functional disability was only twentyfive or thirty percent claimant was fiftynine years of age claimant had little or no education and the injury kept the claimant from performing physical work E. holding that the delivery of an eeoc decision to the former attorney of a claimant did not constitute notice to the claimant

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an aljs determination on side effects was proper where the claimant did not complain about side effects nor did the record disclose any concerns about side effects by the doctors examining the claimant
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: Donnelly, 494 U.S. 820, 110 S.Ct. 1566, 108 L.Ed.2d 834 (1990), are important in resolving the question of whether federal jurisdiction is exclusive in citizen suits brought under the RCRA. These two cases require that Congress either expressly states that federal jurisdiction is exclusive or in some other affirmative way overcomes the strong presumption that jurisdiction is concurrent with state courts. This doctrine is an integral part of our system of federalism. The federal courts cannot create Congressional intent, if it is left unstated, by making an assumption that federal jurisdiction should be exclusive. Rather, the strong presumption is in favor of concurrent jurisdiction in the state courts. See Holmes Fin. Assocs. v. Resolution Trust Corp., 33 F.3d 561, 565 (6th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). In the instant case, we find that the citizen Options: A. holding that federal courts must apply state substantive law in diversity cases B. holding that state courts must apply the federal pleading standard in fela cases C. holding that plaintiffs complaint did not invoke federal courts arising under jurisdiction because it put forth alternate state and federal policies to support its state law claim D. holding that in diversity cases federal courts are to apply state substantive law and federal procedural law E. holding that congress must affirmatively divest the state courts of their presumptive competence to heai cases arising under federal law

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that congress must affirmatively divest the state courts of their presumptive competence to heai cases arising under federal 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: “the facts known to the officers,” Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 330-31, 110 S.Ct. 2412, 110 L.Ed.2d 301 (1990), and “balance the privacy-related and law enforcement-related concerns,” Illinois v. McArthur, 531 U.S. 326, 331, 121 S.Ct. 946, 148 L.Ed.2d 838 (2001). Here, the police knew that two serious stabbings had occurred (one soon-to-be fatal), and they were armed with reliable Information that the perpetrators were among the group of individuals inside or lined up outside of the 30-30 Club. The police could have reasonably believed that the delay necessary to procure a warrant would thwart the possibility of ever finding the perpetrators, by increasing the likelihood that one or more of them would be able to get away. See United States v. Gordils, 982 F.2d 64, 69 (2d Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). The police had two eyewitnesses who were able Options: A. holding that the absence of legitimate income supports the finding of probable cause in a forfeiture action B. holding that officers involvement in daytoday operations supports finding of personal liability C. holding that substantial evidence supports an adverse credibility finding if it is supported by specific cogent reasons D. holding that the record supports the trial judges implicit finding of nonpretextuality E. holding that a likelihood that the suspect will escape supports a finding of exigency

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a likelihood that the suspect will escape supports a finding of exigency
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: consequently , in the event of such unauthorised use , we and our affiliates and/or licensors ( as applicable ) shall have the right , in addition to any other legal remedies available , to seek an immediate injunction against you prohibiting any further use of the skyscanner services and/or skyscanner platforms .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Company and Founder with respect to the sale of the Assets and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous written or oral agreements, whether express or implied, related to the sale of the Assets.

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: that remand is discretionary with the court. 17 . This local rule provides in relevant part: [I]f a motion requires consideration of matters not established by the pleadings, the moving party at the time of delivery and service of its supporting brief shall file with the Clerk such evidentiary materials, including discovery materials and affidavits, as are being relied upon and have not previously been filed, and shall serve a copy of them upon each other party; such documents shall not be attached to the brief.... Documents must be identified and authenticated by affidavit.... 18 . Converting Ameritrade's motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment would preclude the possibility of Green voluntarily dismissing the action pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 41(a n. 9 (8th Cir. 1997) (<HOLDING>). 20 . In such event, however, the case once Options: A. holding that court could consider prospectus that was not attached to complaint B. holding that court may look both to complaint itself and to any documents attached as exhibits to complaint C. holding court could consider a mortgage agreement not attached to the complaint in ruling on motion to dismiss because the complaint refers to the mortgage numerous times the mortgage is attached to this motion and is central to plaintiffs claims D. holding that the court may consider an article not attached to the complaint in determining whether to dismiss the complaint because the article was integral to and explicitly relied on in the complaint and because the plaintiffs did not challenge its authenticity E. holding that it was appropriate for the district court to refer to the documents attached to the motion to dismiss since the documents were referred to in the complaint

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that court could consider prospectus that was not attached to complaint
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 U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 401 U.S. 480 91 S.Ct. 966 28 L.Ed.2d 205 GROVE PRESS, INC., et al., appellants,v.MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF CENSORS. No. 63. Supreme Court of the United States October Term, 1970. March 8, 1971 Edward de Grazia, Alexandria, Va., for appellants. Francis B. Burch, Baltimore, Md., for appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court. 2 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 3
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED UNDER, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. The provisions in Sections 12.08(b) through (d) and Section 12.09 of the Credit Agreement shall apply, mutatis mutandis , to this Amendment and the parties hereto.

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

user: Read the following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 421 U.S. 772 95 S.Ct. 2410 44 L.Ed.2d 571 Edwin EDWARDS, Governor of Louisiana, et al., appellants,v.Marsha B. HEALY et al. No. 73-759. Supreme Court of the United States June 9, 1975 Kendall L. Vick, New Orleans, La., for appellants. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, New York City, for appellees. PER CURIAM. 1 The judgment of the District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana is vacated and the case is remanded to that court to consider whether in the light of recent changes in the state constitutional, statutory, and other rules applicable to this case the cause has become moot. 2 Mr. Justice DOUGLAS took no part in the decision of this case.

assistant: 9
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 are no restrictions in any Organization Document governing any Pledged Equity or any other document related thereto which would limit or restrict (i) the grant of a Lien pursuant to this Agreement on such Pledged Equity, (ii) the perfection of such Lien or (iii) the exercise of remedies in respect of such perfected Lien in the Pledged Equity as contemplated by this Agreement. Except for (i) the filing or recording of UCC financing statements, (ii) the filing of appropriate notices with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the United States Copyright Office, (iii) obtaining control to perfect the Liens created by this Agreement (to the extent required under Section 4(a) hereof), (iv) such actions as may be required by Laws affecting the offering and sale of securities, (v) such actions as may be required by applicable foreign Laws affecting the pledge of the Pledged Equity of Foreign Subsidiaries and (vi) consents, authorizations, filings or other actions which have been obtained or made, no consent or authorization of, filing with, or other act by or in respect of, any arbitrator or Governmental Authority and no consent of any other Person (including, without limitation, any stockholder, member or creditor of such Obligor), is required for (A) the grant by such Obligor of the security interest in the Collateral granted hereby or for the execution, delivery or performance of this Agreement by such Obligor, (B) the perfection of such security interest (to the extent such security interest can be perfected by filing under the UCC, the granting of control (to the extent required under Section 4(a) hereof) or by filing an appropriate notice with the United States Patent and Trademark Office or the United States Copyright Office) or (C) the exercise by the Administrative Agent or the holders of the Obligations of the rights and remedies provided for in this Agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Restricted Shares shall vest and the forfeiture restrictions shall lapse as follows, in each case, subject to the Participant’s continued employment in good standing through the applicable vesting date: (i) 25% of the Restricted Shares will be vested as of the date of grant; and (ii) 25% of the Restricted Shares will vest on each of the first, second and third calendar years following the year in which the applicable Performance Period ends (e.g., for awards granted in respect of the initial Performance Period ending December 31, 2017, 25% would be vested on the date of grant in early 2018, and an additional 25% would vest on the anniversaries of the date of grant in each of 2019, 2020 and 2021). Except as otherwise set forth below, upon the termination of a Participant’s employment with the Company and its Affiliates, all unvested Restricted Shares not then vested as of the date of termination shall not vest (except as otherwise provided herein) and shall be forfeited back to the Plan.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: more evidence, it provided insufficient guidance as to exactly what evidence she needed to support her claim. It stated merely that she should submit “[additional evidence or a further written statement as to the facts and/or law.” (A.R. at 75.) Moreover, the Appeals Council failed to first give the ALJ an opportunity to re-weigh the evidence in light of her previous credibility determination. (See A.R. at 74-76.) IV. Conclusion For the reasons stated, the court believes that Plaintiff, now represented by counsel, should have the opportunity to fully develop the record with the assistance of an administrative law judge so that a proper determination of her eligibility for widow’s benefits can be made. See Evangelista v. Secr’y of Health & Human Servs., 826 F.2d 136, 139 (1st Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the court recommends that the Options: A. holding an argument waived in part because the party failed to develop it in the district court B. holding that it is appropriate to remand to the plan administrator when the administrative record is incomplete C. holding that where issues were not considered by the bia remand is appropriate D. holding that the appropriate remedy on vacatur is to remand the case for further arbitration proceedings consistent with the cba E. holding that remand is appropriate in part where the court determines that further evidence is necessary to develop the facts of the case fully

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that remand is appropriate in part where the court determines that further evidence is necessary to develop the facts of the case fully
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: argument that first-filed qui tam complaints must meet a heightened pleading standard under Rule 9(b) in order to'bar later-filed complaints. C. Dismissal with Prejudice Batiste argues that because Zahara’s complaint was dismissed before Batiste’s complaint was dismissed, his complaint should not have been dismissed with prejudice (implying that Batiste would like the opportunity to amend his complaint and bring this case again). Batiste, however, waived this argument. Zahara was dismissed eighteen months prior to the Batiste dismissal. During that time, Batiste never asked for leave to amend his complaint in the district court; thus, he has waived his opportunity to file a new suit on these same grounds now. See Confederate Mem’l Ass’n v. Hines, 995 F.2d 295, 299 (D.C.Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). III. Conclusion For the reasons set forth Options: A. holding that although district courts have discretion to deny leave to amend they may only do so for a substantial reason B. holding the district court is not required to grant a plaintiff leave to amend his complaint sua sponte when the plaintiff who is represented by counsel never filed a motion to amend nor requested leave to amend before the district court C. holding district court did not abuse its discretion in not granting plaintiffs leave to amend complaint for a third time D. holding that dismissal with leave to amend should be granted even if no request to amend was made E. recognizing that although leave to amend generally should be freely granted that decision is left to the district courts discretion and as in the present case not only was there no abuse of discretion it appears that appellants never properly requested an opportunity to amend in the district court

assistant: The best answer is E. recognizing that although leave to amend generally should be freely granted that decision is left to the district courts discretion and as in the present case not only was there no abuse of discretion it appears that appellants never properly requested an opportunity to amend in the district 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: arising out of the subcontract. Finally, Whiting was not a party to the Cable-La-Williams contract, which contained the Oklahoma forum-selection clause. This evidence demonstrates that under the familiar “minimum contacts” analysis Whiting is not subject to personal jurisdiction in Oklahoma. See generally Lesnick v. Hollingsworth & Vose Co., 35 F.3d 939, 941-46 (4th Cir.1994) (citing International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945)). Thus transferring Cable-La’s third-party complaint to the Northern District of Oklahoma, and thereby forcing Whiting to defend itself in a forum which does not possess personal jurisdiction over it, would be inappropriate. 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a); see also Kontoulas v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 312, 315 (4th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>); 3 Moore’s § 14.42[4] (discussing impact of Options: A. holding that court did not have personal jurisdiction over nonresident defendant because plaintiff failed to show that defendant was assignee of assignor over whom court had personal jurisdiction B. holding that section 1406a grants district courts power to transfer cases even where personal jurisdiction is lacking C. holding that title vii is subject to the transfer provisions of section 1404a D. holding district lacking personal jurisdiction over defendant not one in which suit might have been brought under section 1404a E. holding that under 28 usc 1404a might have been brought requirement was not satisfied by defendants consent to jurisdiction

assistant: The best answer is D. holding district lacking personal jurisdiction over defendant not one in which suit might have been brought under section 1404a
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 Restricted Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect (i) its legal existence, and (ii) the rights, licenses, permits, privileges and franchises material to the conduct of its business, except, in the case of the preceding clause (i) (other than with respect to the Borrower) or clause (ii), to the extent that the failure to do so would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; provided that the foregoing shall not prohibit any transaction permitted under Section 6.03 or 6.11.

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: in an action at law [or] suit in equity.... 42 U.S.C. § 1983. There are two ways in which an individual may be held liable under § 1983 — he may be sued for his own personal actions (“direct liability”), or, under certain limited circumstances, for the actions of his subordinates (“supervisoral liability”), see, e.g., Lewis v. Smith, 855 F.2d 736, 738 (11th Cir.1988). When a government official is sued under a theory of direct liability, he may seek summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. To even be potential ly eligible for summary judgment due to qualified immunity, the official must have been engaged in a “discretionary function” when he performed the acts of which the plaintiff complains. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 2738, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (<HOLDING>). It is the burden of the governmental official Options: A. holding officials are entitled to qualified immunity for reasonable mistakes of law B. recognizing that supreme court has not clearly explained role of discretionary functions in qualified immunity analysis C. holding that qualified immunity extends to government officials performing discretionary functions D. recognizing the qualified immunity from liability extended to a police officer in performing discretionary functions achieves this balance E. holding that quasijudicial immunity extends only to officials who perform discretionary functions

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that qualified immunity extends to government officials performing discretionary functions
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, Employee shall be entitled initially to 25 days of paid vacation per calendar year, as accrued in accordance with the Company’s vacation benefit policy. The Company may be converting to a Paid-Time-Off Policy (“ PTO ”) and, upon such conversion, Employee’s vacation time will be replaced with PTO leave, as applicable to similarly situated employees.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as described in the SEC Filings, there are no material pending legal proceedings before any court or governmental agency or body, domestic or foreign, having jurisdiction over Parent or any of its properties against or affecting Parent, its subsidiaries or any of its or their properties, and to Parent’s knowledge, no such material legal proceedings are threatened.

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: reasoning was undermined by the Supreme Court’s subsequent retroactivity cases, such as Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 128 L.Ed.2d 229 (1994), and St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 121 S.Ct. 2271, 150 L.Ed.2d 347. While we have recently sug gested that, in light of St. Cyr, Buitrago-Cues-ta's holding may perhaps have to be read not to apply to aliens who pleaded guilty before the enactment of the five-year bar, see, e.g., Theodoropoulos v. INS, 358 F.3d 162, 168 (2d Cir.2004) (citing, inter alia, De Cardenas v. Reno, 278 F.Supp.2d 284, 294 (D.Conn.2003)), it 119 (9th Cir.2002) (same in AEDPA context); DeLeon-Holguin v. Ashcroft, 253 F.3d 811, 814 (5th Cir.2001) (same) with Cunningham v. Attorney General, 335 F.3d 1262, 1267 (11th Cir.2003) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); Alanis-Bustamante v. Reno, 201 F.3d 1303, Options: A. holding in the iirira context that the combination of service of the order to show cause and the issuance of a detainer notice sufficed to begin the proceedings B. holding that for purposes of the iirira proceedings commence only upon the inss filing of a notice to appear with the immigration court C. holding in the iirira context that service of the notice to appear was on the facts of that case sufficient to start proceedings D. holding that the burden is on the plaintiff to allege facts sufficient to establish jurisdiction E. holding that defendant failed to plead sufficient facts and instructing the trial court to dismiss the plaintiff from the case

assistant: The best answer is C. holding in the iirira context that service of the notice to appear was on the facts of that case sufficient to start proceedings
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 Executive shall at all times render his services at the direction of the Board of Directors (the "Board of Directors") and the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and shall report primarily to the Chief Executive Officer and, with respect to financial matters, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company. His duties generally will include those required for the day to day and long term planning, development, and operation of the financial administration of the Company. The Company may assign to the Executive such other executive and financial administrative duties for the Company or any affiliate of the Company as may be determined by the Board of Directors, consistent with the Executive's status as Controller and Director of Finance. The Executive agrees to diligently use his best efforts to promote and further the reputation and good name of the Company and perform his services well and faithfully.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Excluded from Claims are claims, actions, liabilities, proceedings, losses, and expenses (including attorneys’ fees) arising out of or with respect to the death of or injury to any person or damage to any property, by whomsoever suffered, to the extent resulting or claimed to result from a latent or patent defect in a Product (each a “ Product Liability Claim ”). Buyer and Seller each will take all commercially reasonable actions, and cooperate with the other Party, as may be necessary to (i) tender each Product Liability Claim to the Vendor or manufacturer of the applicable Product and (ii) cause the Vendor or manufacturer to assume and bear financial responsibility for, and hold Buyer and Seller harmless from, the Product Liability Claim to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law, including the legal defense of the Product Liability Claim.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Tag-along Stockholder who does not deliver a Tag-along Notice in compliance with Section 3.5(d)(ii) shall be deemed to have waived all of such Tag-along Stockholder’s rights to participate in the Tag-along Sale with respect to the Common Shares owned by such Tag-along Stockholder, and the Selling Stockholder shall (subject to the rights of any other participating Tag-along Stockholder and the requirements of Section 3.1) thereafter be free to sell to the Proposed Transferee the Common Shares identified in the Sale Notice at a per Common Share price that is no greater than the applicable per Common Share price set forth in the Sale Notice and on other terms and conditions which are not in the aggregate materially more favorable to the Selling Stockholder than those set forth in the Sale Notice, without any further obligation to the non-accepting Tag-along Stockholders.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that an IQ of 71 was within the range of § 12.05(C)). Obviously, the Court is not bound by any of these decisions. The Court, however, finds the reasoning in Bendt, and its reliance on Cockerham v. Sullivan, 895 F.2d 492, 495 (8th Cir.1990), to be most persuasive. In Bendt, the district court noted that “[incorporating a 5 point measurement error into a claimant’s I.Q. test results would effectively expand the requisite I.Q. under listing 12.05(C) from test scores of 60 to 70 to test scores of 60 to 75.” Bendt, 940 F.Supp. at 1431. The court concluded that this would alter the range of I.Q.’s which satisfy the Listing of Impairments for Mental Retardation and Autism in contradiction of the federal regulations interpreting the Act, and the court cited Cockerham, 895 F.2d at 495-96 (<HOLDING>). Consequently, the Court finds that the ALJ’s Options: A. holding that the same inference on the same record as that here was supported by substantial evidence B. holding that an aljs finding that a claimants iq score of 71 was not within the range of 6069 was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole C. holding that court reviews aljs decision for substantial evidence on the record as a whole including the new evidence submitted after the determination was made D. holding that the district courts finding of no discrimination was not clearly erroneous because the finding was supported by the record E. holding that a finding of fact is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole if it would have been possible for a reasonable jury to reach the boards conclusion

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that an aljs finding that a claimants iq score of 71 was not within the range of 6069 was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No delay or omission to exercise any right, power, or remedy accruing to a party upon any breach or default of another party under this Agreement shall impair any such right, power, or remedy of such party, nor shall it be construed to be a waiver of any such breach or default, or an acquiescence therein, or of or in any similar breach or default thereafter occurring; nor shall any waiver of any single breach or default be deemed a waiver of any other breach or default theretofore or thereafter occurring. No waiver of any term, provision or condition of this Agreement, whether by conduct or otherwise, in any one or more instances, shall be deemed to be, or be construed as, a further or continuing waiver of any such term, provision or condition or as a waiver of any other term, provision or condition of this Agreement. Any agreement on the part of a party or parties hereto to any waiver shall be valid only if set forth in an instrument in writing signed on behalf of such party or parties, as applicable. Any delay in exercising any right under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of such right.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to tenants, visitors, solicitors, workmen and other members of the public.” Acosta, 965 F.2d at 1252. Accordingly, the majority of Circuits stand with the Third Circuit in finding no reasonable expectation of privacy in the common areas of a multi-unit apartment building. See e.g., United States v. Nohara, 3 F.3d 1239, 1241 (9th Cir.1993) (finding no reasonable expectation of privacy in the hallways of a high security, high rise apartment complex); United States v. Concepcion, 942 F.2d 1170, 1172 (7th Cir.1991) (noting that “the area outside one’s door lacks anything like the privacy of the area inside”, and holding that “a tenant has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the common areas of an apartment building.”); United States v. Holland, 755 F.2d 253, 255 (2d Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Eisler, 567 F.2d 814, 816 Options: A. holding that common halls and lobbies of multitenant buildings are not within an individual tenants zone of privacy even though they are guarded by locked doors B. holding that when regulations are intended to have different purposes and are not dependent on each other they are not intertwined C. holding that arguments that are not raised or that are not accompanied by factual and legal support are deemed waived D. holding that claims are related if they involve a common core of facts or they are based on related legal theories E. holding that even though motive and opportunity are not sufficient to prove identity they are circumstances indicative of guilt

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that common halls and lobbies of multitenant buildings are not within an individual tenants zone of privacy even though they are guarded by locked doors
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed and delivered (including by facsimile transmission) in two (2) or more counterparts, and by the different Parties in separate counterparts, each of which when executed and delivered shall be deemed to be an original but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: By the issuance of a Letter of Credit (or an amendment to a Letter of Credit increasing the amount thereof) and without any further action on the part of the applicable Issuing Bank or the Lenders, such Issuing Bank hereby grants to each Lender, and each Lender hereby acquires from such Issuing Bank, a participation in such Letter of Credit equal to such Lender’s Applicable Percentage of the aggregate amount available to be drawn under such Letter of Credit. In consideration and in furtherance of the foregoing, each Lender hereby absolutely and unconditionally agrees to pay to the Administrative Agent, for the account of the applicable Issuing Bank, such Lender’s Applicable Percentage of each LC Disbursement made by such Issuing Bank and not reimbursed by the Borrower on the date due as provided in paragraph (e) of this Section, or of any reimbursement payment required to be refunded to the Borrower for any reason. Each Lender acknowledges and agrees that its obligation to acquire participations pursuant to this paragraph in respect of Letters of Credit is absolute and unconditional and shall not be affected by any circumstance whatsoever, including any amendment, renewal or extension of any Letter of Credit or the occurrence and continuance of a Default or reduction or termination of the Commitments, and that each such payment shall be made without any offset, abatement, withholding or reduction whatsoever.

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: This Agreement constitutes and contain the entire agreement between the Company and the Noteholders and supersede any and all prior agreements, negotiations, correspondence, understandings and communications among the Parties, whether written or oral, respecting the subject matter hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Tenant agrees to cooperate in good faith with Landlord and its lenders in connection with any financing by Landlord, including reasonably consenting to an amendment to the Lease, consistent with Sections 18.2 and 18.4 , based upon a lender’s good faith determination of any deficiencies in the Lease that cause the Lease not to be financeable; provided that any such amendment does not (a) materially decrease Tenant’s rights or Landlord’s obligations, (b) materially increase Tenant’s obligations, or (c) affect Monthly Minimum Rents or Additional Rent.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There is no material lawsuit, tax claim or adjustment or other dispute pending to the best of the Borrower’s knowledge or threatened against Borrower or the Collateral, which may result, either separately or in the aggregate, in any material adverse change in the assets, properties, business, profits, or condition of Borrower, nor does Borrower know of any basis for any such action, suit, proceeding or investigation. Borrower is in compliance with all Governmental Requirements and has satisfied, prior to delinquency, all taxes due or payable by Borrower or assessed against the Collateral.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, all of which, taken together, shall be considered one and the same instrument and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by each of the parties and delivered to the other party.

assistant: Counterparts