Detailed Instructions: In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Problem:Amended Complaint. 4 . The District Court previously dismissed the Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress claim by stipulation of the parties. 5 . In support of its contention that O'Connell intended to remain in Virginia, the NJTA notes that: (1) O'Connell's program was initially scheduled to end on June 11, 2011, but he remained in Virginia well into 2012; and (2) O'Connell updated his Linkedln profile in May 2011 to reflect a new job title for a position that was located in Virginia. We find this proffer falls well short of "clear and unequivocal" evidence that O'Connell intended to remain in Virginia. First, the reason O'Connell remained in Virginia past his originally scheduled end date was because he underwent treatment for thyroid cancer that required two s 5 (3d Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the references to O'Connell's
Holding statements: (A) holding a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the constitution and laws of the united states to state a claim under 1983 (B) holding that agency must examine the relevant data and articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action quoting state farm 463 us at 43 103 sct 2856alterations omitted (C) holding that the plaintiff must demonstrate that defendants contacts with the united states as a whole support the exercise of jurisdiction consistent with the constitution and laws of the united states (D) holding that in order to present a federal question a right or immunity created by the constitution or laws of the united states must be an element and an essential one of the plaintiffs cause of action quoting franchise tax bd v constr laborers vacation trust 463 us 1 1011 103 sct 2841 77 led2d 420 1983 (E) holding that in order to prevail under 1983 a plaintiff must show 1 that defendants deprived him or her of a right secured by the constitution or laws of the united states and 2 that in doing so defendants acted under color of state law internal quotation marks omitted
Solution:
holding a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the constitution and laws of the united states to state a claim under 1983