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:finds that FMI has failed to satisfy its burden on these issues, it need not address the other criteria. Irreparable Injury Whatever harm FMI may suffer by having its franchise terminated does not constitute irreparable injury. First, the loss of the Audi franchise may result in reduced revenue, but FMI will not go out of business altogether. FMI will still be able to deal in BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Porsche automobiles, and money damages would suffice to compensate for any loss of additional revenue attributable to Audi sales. See C-B Kenworth, Inc. v. General Motors Corp., 675 F.Supp. 686, 687-88 (D.C.Me.1987) (finding all alleged injuries from loss of truck franchise to be compen-sable at law); Miller Plymouth Center, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 286 F.Supp. 529, 532 (D.Mass.1968) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, given FMI's poor customer service
Holding statements: (A) recognizing that impossibility but not mere difficulty excuses a partys performance (B) recognizing that courts and commentators have had difficulty determining the meaning of good faith in the definition of fair consideration (C) recognizing the difficulty of calculating damages but not finding the task impossible (D) recognizing the difficulty of determining a nonspeculative hypotheticallicense damages amount when the infringer is a direct competitor (E) recognizing the difficulty of precisely pleading the effects on interstate commerce before completion of discovery
Solution:
recognizing that impossibility but not mere difficulty excuses a partys performance