diff --git "a/legal.json" "b/legal.json"
deleted file mode 100644--- "a/legal.json"
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,180 +0,0 @@
-{"qid": "0", "question": "what is the start date of court U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Kentucky?", "answer": "1901-01-01"}
-{"qid": "1", "question": "what is the start date of court Circuit Court of the 12th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Manatee County?", "answer": "1973-01-01"}
-{"qid": "2", "question": "what is the start date of court Oyer and Terminer, Rensselaer County?", "answer": "1788-01-01"}
-{"qid": "3", "question": "When is the North Dakota Court of Appeals court scheduled to start?", "answer": "1987-09-01"}
-{"qid": "4", "question": "When is the Circuit Court of the 3rd Judicial Circuit of Florida, Columbia County court scheduled to start?", "answer": "1973-01-01"}
-{"qid": "5", "question": "When does the court Oregon Supreme Court commence?", "answer": "1841-01-01"}
-{"qid": "6", "question": "When does the court New York Court of Sessions, Orange County commence?", "answer": "1684-01-01"}
-{"qid": "7", "question": "When is the Court Of Oyer And Terminer New York court scheduled to start?", "answer": "1788-01-01"}
-{"qid": "8", "question": "When is the U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Georgia court scheduled to start?", "answer": "1848-01-01"}
-{"qid": "9", "question": "Can you tell me the commencement date of District Court, Canal Zone court?", "answer": "1937-07-26"}
-{"qid": "10", "question": "What date does court District Court, Canal Zone end on?", "answer": "1982-03-31"}
-{"qid": "11", "question": "What date does court New York Circuit Court, Kings County end on?", "answer": "1846-12-31"}
-{"qid": "12", "question": "When does court U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Missouri conclude?", "answer": "1911-12-31"}
-{"qid": "13", "question": "What date does court Miami Municipal Court end on?", "answer": "1977-12-31"}
-{"qid": "14", "question": "On which date is the conclusion of court Osceola County Court?", "answer": "1972-12-31"}
-{"qid": "15", "question": "When does court U.S. Circuit Court for the District of West Virginia conclude?", "answer": "1901-12-31"}
-{"qid": "16", "question": "what is the end date of court Passaic County Circuit Court, N.J.?", "answer": "1947-12-31"}
-{"qid": "17", "question": "What date does court District Court, D. California end on?", "answer": "1886-08-05"}
-{"qid": "18", "question": "When does court Duval County Judge's Court conclude?", "answer": "1972-12-31"}
-{"qid": "19", "question": "What date does court U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Idaho end on?", "answer": "1911-12-31"}
-{"qid": "20", "question": "Could you provide the citation string of Xenia Municipal Court court?", "answer": "Oh. Muni. Ct., Xenia"}
-{"qid": "21", "question": "what is the citation string of court Petersburg County Circuit Court?", "answer": "Petersburg Cir. Ct."}
-{"qid": "22", "question": "what is the citation string of court Court of Appeals of Ohio, Seventh District, Noble County?", "answer": "Oh. Ct. App. 7th Dist. Noble"}
-{"qid": "23", "question": "What would be the citation string of the court called Clermont County Municipal Court?", "answer": "Oh. Muni. Ct., Clermont"}
-{"qid": "24", "question": "Can you tell me the citation string for the court Miami County Probate Court?", "answer": "Oh. Prob. Ct., Miami"}
-{"qid": "25", "question": "Can you tell me the citation string for the court Broward County Court?", "answer": "Fla. Broward Cty. Ct."}
-{"qid": "26", "question": "what is the citation string of court United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts?", "answer": "Bankr. D. Mass."}
-{"qid": "27", "question": "what is the citation string of court Perry County Probate Court?", "answer": "Oh. Prob. Ct., Perry"}
-{"qid": "28", "question": "Can you tell me the citation string for the court Perry Circuit Court?", "answer": "Oh. Circ. Ct., Perry"}
-{"qid": "29", "question": "Can you tell me the citation string for the court Nebraska Attorney General Reports?", "answer": "Neb. Att'y Gen."}
-{"qid": "30", "question": "which court is handling the case listed under the PACER docket number 472074.0?", "answer": "United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas"}
-{"qid": "31", "question": "Which court is taking care of the case that has the PACER docket number 428131.0?", "answer": "United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah"}
-{"qid": "32", "question": "which court is handling the case listed under the PACER docket number 108735.0?", "answer": "United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Hampshire"}
-{"qid": "33", "question": "Can you tell me which court is overseeing the case with the PACER docket number 29392.0?", "answer": "District Court, N.D. New York"}
-{"qid": "34", "question": "which court is handling the case listed under the PACER docket number 8395.0?", "answer": "District Court, S.D. Iowa"}
-{"qid": "35", "question": "Can you tell me which court is overseeing the case with the PACER docket number 47905.0?", "answer": "District Court, E.D. North Carolina"}
-{"qid": "36", "question": "Can you tell me which court is overseeing the case with the PACER docket number 104457.0?", "answer": "District Court, E.D. Texas"}
-{"qid": "37", "question": "Which court is taking care of the case that has the PACER docket number 404570.0?", "answer": "United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota"}
-{"qid": "38", "question": "Which court is managing the case listed with the PACER docket number 99770.0?", "answer": "District Court, S.D. Indiana"}
-{"qid": "39", "question": "Which court is managing the case listed with the PACER docket number 291064.0?", "answer": "United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York"}
-{"qid": "40", "question": "Who are the legal representatives for the case related to this opinion cluster: < p > 1. where the drawees of a bill of exchange absent themselves from their place of business and make no provision for its payment, a presentment there to their book - keeper is a sufficient presentment to charge the drawers. < / p > < p > 2. the holder of a bill of exchange does not waive his right of action for its non - acceptance by afterwards having it presented and protested for non - payment. < / p >?", "answer": "Wm. Cooper, for plaintiff, insisted\u2014, Peters & L. P. Walker, for defendant:"}
-{"qid": "41", "question": "Who are the attorneys for the case corresponding to this opinion cluster: < p > ( syllabus by editorial staff. ) < / p > < p > constitutional law < & wkey ; 74 \u2014 master and servant & wkey ; = 347 \u2014 employers \u2019 liability act unconstitutional in requiring court to determine employer \u2019 s solvency. < / p > < p > employers \u2019 liability act, \u00a7 22, as amended by acts 1920, no. 247, \u00a7 22, requiring the district court of the employer \u2019 s domicile, if it appears there is reasonable room for uncertainty as to the financial responsibility of the employer against whom liability for compensation has accrued, to order the employer to furnish bond, etc., held violative of const, art. 96, providing no functions except such as are judicial shall ever be attached to the district court or the several justices or judges thereof ; determination of the solvency of an employer not being judicial. < / p >?", "answer": "Miller, Miller & Eletchinger, of New Orleans, ilr applicant;, J. C. Henriques, of New Orleans, an\u00f1cus curise."}
-{"qid": "42", "question": "Who are the legal representatives for the case related to this opinion cluster: < p > mills v. greent 159 tj. s. 651, affirmed to the point that when, pending an appeal from the judgment of a lower court, and without any fault of the defendant, an event'occurs which renders it impossible for the appellate court, if it should decide the case in fav. or of the plaintiff, to grant him \u2022 any effectual relief, the court will not proceed to a formal judgment, but will dismiss - the appeal. < / p >?", "answer": "Mr. J. B. Beckwith argued for appellant on the 22d day of November, 1895. At the close of his argument the court adjourned until the 2d day of December following. Mr. William, Wirt Howe on that day presented himself to argue for appellees, but the court declined to hear further argument in the case."}
-{"qid": "43", "question": "Who are the attorneys for the case corresponding to this opinion cluster: < p > 1. insurance \u2014 assignment of policy \u2014 omission of piame of assignee. \u2014 a single man took out a policy of insurance on his life payable to his sister, but with the right to change the beneficiary at any time. shortly thereafter he married, and several times requested the agent who solicited the insurance to substitute his wife \u2019 s name as beneficiary, and this the agent promised to do, but through neglect and forgetfulness failed to do so, and the assured died. thereupon the beneficiary, sister of deceased, intending to assign the policy to the widow, voluntarily executed and delivered to the attorneys of the widow a paper under hand and seal assigning and transferring the policy, but inadvertently omitting the name of the assignee. the assignment also relinquishes all of her interest in said policy, and any and all claims against the insurance company pertaining to said policy. shortly thereafter the sister repented of her act, claimed that the assignment was obtained by fraud, and that she was still the beneficiary under said policy ; but the charge of fraud was not sustained. a bill was filed by the widow against the insurance company and the sister to recover the amount?", "answer": "Longley <\u00a3\u25a0 Jordan, for the appellant., J. O. Wysor and W. S. Tipton, for the appellees."}
-{"qid": "44", "question": "Who are the legal representatives for the case related to this opinion cluster: < p > construction of statutes : the united states is a real, rather than a nominal party, to proceedings brought in its name, by creditors of contractors for the construction of public buildings on account of materials or labor furnished to such contractors, under act of congress of february 24, 1905 : 33 stat. l., part 1, p.. 811. < / p > < p > jurisdiction \u2014 tj. s. circuit cowrts : this being so, united states circuit courts have jurisdiction of such cases. < / p > < p > same \u2014 v. s. district court, district of sawain : the u. s. district court for the territory of hawaii, having the powers and jurisdiction of a circuit court, has jurisdiction of such cases. < / p > < p > same \u2014 same \u2014 construction -. the fact that the act of february 24, 1905, was passed after the organic act which gave such powers to the said district court, does not affect the question, for such powers by reasonable construction were intended to include such now powers as subsequent legislation might add to the then existing powers of the circuit courts ; but if not, the fact that the act of february 24, 1905. is an amendment and enlargement of the act of?", "answer": "Smith & Leivis, Attorneys for Plaintiff., Thompson & Clemons, Attorneys for Defendant Tbe Aetna Indemnity Company., B. IP. Breckons and IP. TP. Thayer, Appearing as Amici Curiae."}
-{"qid": "45", "question": "Could you tell me the attorneys for the case represented by this opinion cluster: < p > contract \u2014 public policy. < / p > < p > an agreement to procure the consent of property owners for the construction and maintenance of a trolley line in front of their properties, and also to obtain a municipal franchise to operate such trolley line for a fee contingent upon success, held to be contrary to public policy, and void, and that no part of the stipulated compensation can be recovered. < / p > < p > [ ed. note. \u2014 for eases in point, see vol. 11, cent. dig. contracts, \u00a7 587. ] < / p > < p > ( syllabus by the court. ) < / p >?", "answer": "Patterson & Rhome, for plaintiff., John M. Enright, for defendant."}
-{"qid": "46", "question": "Could you tell me the attorneys for the case represented by this opinion cluster: < p > 1. carriers. notation on receipt for c. o. d. shipment as to amount to be collected not declaration of value limiting liability. < / p > < p > where an interstate common carrier of express accepted an interstate shipment of the value of one hundred and fifty - five dollars, issuing therefor its receipt containing certain recitals, stipulations, and blank spaces, which form of receipt and contents had been authorized by the interstate commerce commisson, assuming to act under the authority of interstate commerce act feb. 4, 1887, as amended by the carmack amendment ( u. s. comp. st., sections 8604a, 8604aa ), and first and second cummins amendments ( u. s. comp., st., sections 8592, 8604a ), which form of receipt had been published by the express company and was on file in its offices, as well as with the interstate commerce commission, in which receipt there is a provision giving the shipper a lower rate in consideration of a declared value in writing by the shipper, and there is a blank space in such receipt for such declared or released value, which space was left blank, and in the blank space there?", "answer": "R. L. MoLaurin, for appellant., Bruini c6 Hirsch, for appellees."}
-{"qid": "47", "question": "Can you identify the lawyers involved in the case associated with this opinion cluster: < p > negligence \u2014 municipalities \u2014 open trench in street \u2014 contributory negligence \u2014 case for jury. < / p > < p > 1. where a city has by proper proceedings widened a street which was actually built up, and thereafter through a contractor opened a trench along the untraveled portion of the street for the purpose of constructing a sewer, and places temporary crossings over the trench in front of the houses, as an invitation to those occupying the houses and those visiting them to use the crossings, the city is bound properly to guard and light such crossing at night as will reasonably protect persons using them ; and if a woman in the night - time attempts to use one of the crossings without negligence on her part, and falls into the trench and is injured, the city is liable to pay her for the injuries which she had sustained. < / p > < p > 2. in such a case if the woman has but a vague knowledge of the existence of the trench, and there is no light at the crossing to guide her, or barriers along the side to protect her, she cannot be charged with contributory negligence as a matter of law in attempting the crossing. < / p > < p > 3. where a city lets out a contract for the construction of a?", "answer": "Thomas Boylan, with him Paul Reilly, assistant city solicitors, and Michael J. Ryan, city solicitor, for appellant., Frank Rogers Donahue, for appellee."}
-{"qid": "48", "question": "Who are the attorneys for the case corresponding to this opinion cluster: < p > deeds \u2014 reservation \u2014 mineral rights \u2014 petroleum, and natural gas \u2014 c onsiruction. < / p > < p > a reservation of mineral and mining rights in a deed will not be construed to include petroleum and natural gas, in the absence of clear evidence of an intention of the parties to so include them. < / p >?", "answer": "Peter M. Speer, with him George A. Chase and George W. Moore, for appellants., Win. M. Parker and M. J. Heyioang, with them H. O. Dorworth and J. D. Trace, for appellees."}
-{"qid": "49", "question": "Can you identify the lawyers involved in the case associated with this opinion cluster: < p > mechanic's lien \u2014 contract \u2014 right of subcontractor to file lien. < / p > < p > a building contract provided as follows : \u201c it is further agreed that the - party of the first part will not at any time permit any lien, attachment or any other incumbrance, under any law of this state, or otherwise, to be put or remain upon the building or premises, about or upon which any work is done, or materials are furnished under this contract for such work, materials, or by reason of any other claim or demand against the party of the second part. \u201d held, that under the contract subcontractors had a right to file liens for their work or material. gordon v. norton, 186 pa. 168, followed and applied. < / p >?", "answer": "George H. Troutman, with him L. W. DeWitt, and Edward A. Lynch, for appellants.\u2014, George S. Ferris, with him Philip V. Weaver, for appellee."}
-{"qid": "50", "question": "Who are the members of the judiciary attributed with the collection of rulings that contain this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 564 f. 3d 232 ( 2009 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > united states of america, < br > v. < br > anthony lofink, appellant. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. 08 - 3204. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states court of appeals, third circuit. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > submitted under third circuit lar 34. 1 ( a ) march 27, 2009. < / center > < center > filed : april 29, 2009. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 233 < / span > edson a. bostic, tieffa n. harper, federal public defender's office, district of delaware, wilmington, de, for appellant. < / p > < p > christopher j. burke, david c. weiss, u. s. attorney's office, wilmington, de, for appellee. < / p > < p > before : rendell, ambro and jordan, circuit judges. < /", "answer": "Rendell, Ambro and Jordan, Circuit Judges"}
-{"qid": "51", "question": "Which judiciary members are answerable for the cluster of verdicts that carry the following assertion: < p > appellant was convicted of swindling, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $ 100 and sixty days imprisonment in county jail. < / p > < p > the charging part of the indictment is as follows : \" one g. c. glover in the county of johnson and state of texas, did then and there unlawfully devising and intending to secure the unlawful acquisition of certain property, one suit of clothes of the value of twenty - five dollars ( $ 25 ), one overcoat of the value of twenty - two dollars and fifty cents ( $ 22. 50 ), one pair of shoes of the value of six dollars ( $ 6 ), one suit case of the value of six dollars ( $ 6 ), one hat of the value of four dollars ( $ 4 ), two shirts of the value of two dollars and fifty cents ( $ 2. 50 ), one stickpin of the value of one dollar ( $ 1 ), one pair of cuff buttons of the value of two dollars and twenty - five cents ( $ 2. 25 ), four collars of the value of fifty cents ( $ 0. 50 ), and the whole of the above described bill of goods amounting to sixty - nine dollars and seventy - five cents", "answer": "BROOKS, JUDGE."}
-{"qid": "52", "question": "Can you tell me the judges who are responsible for the set of decisions that contain the following opinion: < div > < center > < b > 184 kan. 773 ( 1959 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < b > 339 p. 2d 286 < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > frances j. smith, john j. smith and betty ellen gross, appellees, < br > v. < br > everett russ, appellant. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. 41, 347 < / center > < center > < p > < b > supreme court of kansas. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > opinion filed may 16, 1959. < / center > < p > < i > robert osborn, < / i > of stockton, argued the cause and was on the brief for appellant. < / p > < p > < i > d. a. hindman, < / i > of stockton, argued the cause, and < i > stanley krysl, < / i > also of stockton, was with him on the brief for appellees. < / p > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 774 < / span >", "answer": "Schroeder"}
-{"qid": "53", "question": "Who are the members of the judiciary attributed with the collection of rulings that contain this opinion: < p class = \" case _ cite \" > 174 f. 3d 47 < / p > < p class = \" parties \" > united states of america, appellee, < br > v. < br > nelson a. mccall, defendant - appellant. < / p > < p class = \" docket \" > docket no. 97 - 1662 < / p > < p class = \" court \" > united states court of appeals, < br > second circuit. < / p > < p class = \" date \" > argued aug. 27, 1998. < br > decided dec. 4, 1998. < / p > < div class = \" prelims \" > < p class = \" indent \" > dan himmelfarb, assistant united states attorney for the southern district of new york ( mary jo white, united states attorney, craig a. stewart, assistant united states attorney, of counsel ), for appellee. < / p > < p class = \" indent \" > colleen p. cassidy, the legal aid society, federal defender division, appeals bureau, for appellant. < / p > < p class = \" indent \" > before : winter, chief judge, walker, and mclaughlin, circuit", "answer": "McLaughlin, Walker, Winter"}
-{"qid": "54", "question": "Who are the judicial members accountable for the group of judgments that encompasses the following viewpoint: < p > dear mr. domingue : < / p > < p > you have requested an opinion of this office as to the effect of executive order br - 88 - 23 on parish registrars of voters and their unclassified employees. < / p > < p > it is our opinion, in keeping with op. atty. gen. no. 79 - 998, that registrars of voters are officers of the state government rather than parish government. < / p > < p > the constitution of 1974, provides in article 11, section i : < / p > < blockquote > < p > \" the legislature shall adopt an election code which shall provide for permanent registration of voters and for the conduct of all elections. \" < / p > < / blockquote > < p > pursuant to this constitutional authority, the legislature enacted a revised election code, which provides for the appointment of a registrar of voters in each parish by the governing authority subject to supervision and dismissal by the state board of election supervisors. lsa - r. s. < cross _ reference > 18 : 51 < / cross _ reference >, 53. < / p > < p > the functions of the registrars and their offices are subject to the rules and regulations", "answer": "RICHARD P. IEYOUB"}
-{"qid": "55", "question": "Which members of the judiciary are responsible for the group of rulings that includes the following opinion: < div > < center > < b > 856 s. w. 2d 904 ( 1993 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > harlen j. meyer and george j. biller, jr., plaintiffs - appellants, < br > v. < br > james b. mcgarvie, carol b. mcgarvie, michael zellers, gloria zellers, james f. ferrick, mary w. ferrick and st. louis corporation, defendants - respondents. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. 62628. < / center > < center > < p > < b > missouri court of appeals, eastern district, division two. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > june 22, 1993. < / center > < center > motion for rehearing and / or transfer denied july 28, 1993. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 905 < / span > gallop, johnson & amp ; neuman, michael a. kahn, daniel vogel, clayton, for plaintiffsappellants. < / p > < p > joseph", "answer": "Crandall, Grimm, Pudlowski"}
-{"qid": "56", "question": "Which judiciary members are answerable for the cluster of verdicts that carry the following assertion: < p > this case comes to this court by the allowance of the petition of plaintiff in error for a writ of < em > certiorari < / em > to bring up for review a judgment of the appellate court for the first district affirming the judgment of the circuit court of cook county granting the prayer of the petition of james e. mccann for a writ of < em > mandamus < / em > against plaintiff in error, the retirement board of the policemen's annuity and benefit fund of the city of chicago. no issues of fact are in controversy. < / p > < p > james e. mccann, defendant in error, was for more than twenty years prior to october 1, 1923, a member of the police department of the city of chicago. through successive promotions he was made captain, and at the time of his resignation, october 31, 1923, his annual salary was $ 3500. upon his retirement he applied for and was allowed a pension of $ 1750 annually, which was fifty per cent of his salary at retirement. the annuity or pension was payable in monthly installments of $ 145. 83. that amount was paid regularly for thirteen months, until november 30, 1924. at that time the retirement board reduced the", "answer": "Mr. JUSTICE FARMER delivered the opinion of the court:"}
-{"qid": "57", "question": "Which members of the judiciary are responsible for the group of rulings that includes the following opinion: appendix ii - federal reserve historic prime rates prime year rate ( % ) * 1984 12. 1 % 1985 9. 9 % 1986 8. 3 % 1987 8. 2 % 1988 9. 3 % 1989 10. 9 % 1990 10. 0 % 1991 8. 5 % 1992 6. 3 % 1993 6. 0 % 1994 7. 1 % 1995 8. 8 % 1996 8. 3 % 1997 8. 4 % 1998 8. 4 % 1999 8. 0 % 2000 9. 2 % 2001 7. 0 % 2002 4. 7 % 2003 4. 1 % 2004 4. 3 % 2005 6. 2 % 2006 8. 0 % 2007 8. 1 % 2008 5. 1 % 2009 3. 3 % 2010 3. 3 % 2011 3. 3 % 2012 3. 3 % 2013 3. 3 % 2014 3. 3 % 2015 3. 3 % 2016 3. 5 % 2017 4. 1 % 2018 4. 9 % 2019 5. 3 % 2020 4. 3 % * these annual interest rates were calculcated by averaging the weekly prime rates downloaded from the federal reserve. federal reserve, h. 15 selected interest rates, data download program ( apr. 21, 2020 ), https : / / www. federalreserve. gov /", "answer": "Judge Christopher R. Cooper"}
-{"qid": "58", "question": "Who are the members of the judiciary attributed with the collection of rulings that contain this opinion: not precedential united states court of appeals for the third circuit _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ no. 10 - 2473 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ boban jovanovic, appellant v. northrop grumman corporation on appeal from the united states district court for the district of new jersey ( no. 05 - cv - 04487 ) district judge : hon. dennis m. cavanaugh submitted june 21, 2011 before : chagares, jordan and greenaway, jr., circuit judges. ( filed : june 30, 2011 ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ opinion _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ chagares, circuit judge. plaintiff boban jovanovic appeals from an order of the district court granting defendant northrop grumman corporation \u2019 s motion for summary judgment and denying plaintiff \u2019 s cross - motion for summary judgment. for the reasons that follow, we will affirm. i. because we write solely for the benefit of the parties, we will only briefly recite the essential facts. jovanovic is the sole shareholder in two delaware corporations, genesis international ( \u201c genesis \u201d ) and international infrastructure consortium,", "answer": "Chagares, Greenaway, Jordan"}
-{"qid": "59", "question": "Who are the members of the judiciary attributed with the collection of rulings that contain this opinion: < p > [ editors'note : this page contains headnotes. headnotes are not an official product of the court, therefore they are not displayed. ] < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * page 119 < / span > < / p > < p > [ editors'note : this page contains headnotes. headnotes are not an official product of the court, therefore they are not displayed. ] < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * page 120 < / span > < / p > < p > [ editors'note : this page contains headnotes. headnotes are not an official product of the court, therefore they are not displayed. ] < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * page 121 < / span > < / p > < p > [ editors'note : this page contains headnotes. headnotes are not an official product of the court, therefore they are not displayed. ] < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * page 122 < / span > [ editors'note : this page contains headnotes. headnotes are not an official product of the court, therefore they are not displayed. ] < span class = \" star - pagination \"", "answer": "CHURCH, Ch. J."}
-{"qid": "60", "question": "Could you identify the docket that holds this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 502 f. supp. 2d 1353 ( 2007 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re : schering marketing and sales practices litigation ( no. ii ). < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. mdl no. 1857. < / center > < center > < p > < b > judicial panel on multidistrict litigation. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > august 16, 2007. < / center > < p > < / p > < h2 > transfer order < / h2 > < p > john g. heyburn ii, chairman. < / p > < p > before the entire panel < sup > [ * ] < / sup > : plaintiffs in an action recently transferred under 28 u. s. c. \u00a7 1404 ( a ) to the district of new jersey have moved, pursuant to 28 u. s. c. \u00a7 1407, for centralization of their action then - pending in the district of arizona and an action pending in the district of new jersey for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in the district of arizona or, alternatively? Respond with the pacer case ID, please.", "answer": "568480.0"}
-{"qid": "61", "question": "Could you identify the docket that holds this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 426 b. r. 6 ( 2010 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re sunshine three real estate corporation, debtor. < br > sunshine three real estate corporation, plaintiff < br > v. < br > charles j. housman, trustee of pine banks nominee trust, wallace capital corporation, and steven ross, esq., defendants. < / h1 > < / center > < center > bankruptcy no. 09 - 17821 - jnf. adversary no. 09 - 01330. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states bankruptcy court, d. massachusetts. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > february 18, 2010. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 9 < / span > gershon m. gulko, worcester, ma, for plaintiff. < / p > < p > mackenzie shea, k & amp ; l gates llp, erik t. potter, gilmartin, magence, camiel, & amp ; ross llp, boston, ma, for defendant. <? Respond with the pacer case ID, please.", "answer": "490700.0"}
-{"qid": "62", "question": "Which docket number is associated with the opinion: < div > < center > < b > 18 b. r. 325 ( 1982 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re john k. and maria s. russell, debtors. < br > beneficial consumer discount company, plaintiff, < br > v. < br > john k. and maria s. russell and trustee, defendants. < / h1 > < / center > < center > bankruptcy no. 81 - 00479 t, adv. no. 81 - 0388. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states bankruptcy court, e. d. pennsylvania. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > march 15, 1982. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 326 < / span > mark s. sigmon, bethleham, pa., for plaintiff. < / p > < p > harry a. kitey, allentown, pa., for defendants. < / p > < p > < / p > < h2 > opinion < / h2 > < p > thomas m. twardowski, bankruptcy judge. < /? Please reply with the pacer case ID.", "answer": "432965.0"}
-{"qid": "63", "question": "Which docket number is associated with the opinion: < div > < center > < b > 74 b. r. 218 ( 1987 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in the matter of dean w. calkins, richard g. lyke, debtors. < / h1 > < / center > < center > bankruptcy nos. mm11 - 85 - 02304, mm11 - 85 - 02305. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states bankruptcy court, w. d. wisconsin. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > april 30, 1987. < / center > < p > mary e. bielefeld, trial atty., tax div., u. s. dept. of justice, washington, d. c., for irs. < / p > < p > frank ross, jr., ross & amp ; chatterton, madison, wis., for debtors. < / p > < p > < / p > < h2 > memorandum decision < / h2 > < p > robert d. martin, chief judge. < / p > < p > when guild printing, inc. ( \" guild \" ) filed? Please reply with the pacer case ID.", "answer": "180333.0"}
-{"qid": "64", "question": "What docket number corresponds to this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 238 f. supp. 2d 741 ( 2003 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > telepharmacy solutions, inc., plaintiff, < br > v. < br > pickpoint corporation, defendant. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. civ. a. 2 : 02 - cv - 809. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states district court, e. d. virginia, norfolk division. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > january 8, 2003. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 742 < / span > stephen e. noona, kaufman & amp ; canoles, pc, norfolk, va, for plaintiff. < / p > < p > conrad m. shumadine, willcox & amp ; savage, pc, norfolk, va, for defendant. < / p > < p > < / p > < h2 > < i > opinion and order < / i > < / h2 > < p > rebecca beach smith, district judge? Be sure to answer with the pacer case ID.", "answer": "141124.0"}
-{"qid": "65", "question": "Can you tell me which docket contains this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 958 f. supp. 273 ( 1997 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > american airlines, inc. < br > v. < br > cynthia metzler, acting secretary of the united states department of labor. < / h1 > < / center > < center > civil action no. 4 : 94 - cv - 594 - y. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states district court, n. d. texas, fort worth division. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > april 8, 1997. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 274 < / span > edmund glen johnson, kelly, hart & amp ; hallman, fort worth, tx, john c. fox, craig a. selness, allison b. hubbard, fenwick west, palo alto, ca, for plaintiff. < / p > < p > jonathan watkins, u. s. dept. of justice, employment litigation section, washington, dc, jay d. adelstein, u. s. dept. of justice, civil rights division? Please provide the pacer case ID.", "answer": "32417.0"}
-{"qid": "66", "question": "Could you identify the docket that holds this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 187 b. r. 826 ( 1995 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re walter j. wright, debtor. < br > federal trade commission, plaintiff, < br > v. < br > walter j. wright, defendant. < / h1 > < / center > < center > bankruptcy no. 93 - 50561. adv. no. 93 - 5119. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states bankruptcy court, d. connecticut. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > october 25, 1995. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 827 < / span > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 828 < / span > mary s. feinstein, federal trade commission, division of marketing practices, washington, dc, for plaintiff. < / p > < p > victoria t. ferrara, sherwood, garlick, cowell, diviney & amp ; atwood, westport, ct, for defendant. < / p > < p > < / p >? Respond with the pacer case ID, please.", "answer": "294508.0"}
-{"qid": "67", "question": "What docket includes this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 242 b. r. 192 ( 1999 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re ruth curcio, debtor. < / h1 > < / center > < center > bankruptcy no. 98 - 35314 - bkc - shf. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states bankruptcy court, s. d. florida. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > november 30, 1999. < / center > < p > ruth curcio, boynton beach, fl, pro se. < / p > < p > robert c. furr, boca raton, fl, trustee. < / p > < p > < / p > < h2 > < i > order denying motion to reopen case < / i > < / h2 > < p > steven h. friedman, bankruptcy judge. < / p > < p > this matter came before the court for consideration of the debtor's motion to reopen case. the debtor seeks to reopen her case to add ford motor credit company ( \" ford \" ) as an \" additional creditor \"? Please answer with the pacer case ID.", "answer": "735169.0"}
-{"qid": "68", "question": "Which docket number is associated with the opinion: case : 22 - 1286 document : 92 page : 1 filed : 08 / 01 / 2023 note : this order is nonprecedential. united states court of appeals for the federal circuit _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ teradata corporation, teradata us, inc., teradata operations, inc., plaintiffs - appellants v. sap se, sap america, inc., sap labs llc, defendants - appellees _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2022 - 1286 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ appeal from the united states district court for the northern district of california in no. 3 : 18 - cv - 03670 - who, judge william h. orrick iii. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ per curiam. order upon consideration of the court \u2019 s opinion that the above - captioned appeal be transferred to the u. s. court of appeals for the ninth circuit, it is ordered that : the? Please reply with the pacer case ID.", "answer": "18185.0"}
-{"qid": "69", "question": "Which docket number is associated with the opinion: < div > < center > < b > 131 b. r. 233 ( 1991 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re prime motor inns, inc., et al., debtors. < br > northeast hotel associates, r / c hotel associates, universal motor lodges, southeast hotel associates, hauppauge hotel corp., and pennco hotel corp., plaintiffs < br > v. < br > prime motor inns, inc., et al., defendants. < / h1 > < / center > < center > bankruptcy no. 90 - 16604 - bkc - ajc, adv. no. 91 - 0630 - bkc - ajc - a. < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states bankruptcy court, s. d. florida, miami division. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > august 23, 1991. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 234 < / span > charles kotick, robinson, silverman, pearce, aronsohn & amp ; berman, new york city, marshall cooper, cooper & amp? Please reply with the pacer case ID.", "answer": "739898.0"}
-{"qid": "70", "question": "Which court is this opinion cluster syllabus published: < p > evidence. witness. memoranda. < / p > < p > the testimony of a witness who states facts as of his knowledge, although he be the plaintiff himself, should not be excluded because he kept memoranda of the transactions about which he testifies and failed to produce the same on the trial. < / p >?", "answer": "Mississippi Supreme Court"}
-{"qid": "71", "question": "Where is the opinion cluster syllabus for < p > 1. in a suit upon a promissory note a plea that defendant did not promise as alleged is inapplicable and should be stricken. < / p > < p > 2. where fraud is relied upon in any pleading, facts constituting such fraud should be specially pleaded and the allegations or averments with respect thereto should be specific. if this is not done such pleading will be held insufficient and upon motion will he stricken. < / p > < p > 3. although fraud generally is averred as a defense to an action, if the facts averred upon which the charge of fraud is based do not constitute fraud the pleading may be stricken upon the ground that it states no defense to the action. < / p > < p > 4. in an action upon a promissory note a plea of want of consideration which merely avers that there was no consideration for the note is insufficient because it amounts to a plea of the general issue, which is forbidden in an action of this kind. < / p > < p > 5. where a plea of want of consideration in an action on a promissory note in setting out the facts and circumstances connected with the transaction avers a contemporaneous, independent, parol published? Which court?", "answer": "Supreme Court of Florida"}
-{"qid": "72", "question": "Which court is this opinion cluster syllabus published: < p > 1. stamp act \u2014 garnishee process. process against a garnishee, in aid of a suit at law wherein execution has been returned \u201c nulla iona, \" is not original process, and therefore, under the excise law, is not required to be stamped. < / p > < p > 2. married women \u2014 their rights wider the ad of 1861. the earnings of a married woman are not embraced in the act of 1861, to protect married women in their separate property ; they belong to the husband \u2014 he alone is entitled to them. that act only applies to property, real and personal, and the rents, issues, increase and profits thereof, but not to the earnings of the wife. < / p >?", "answer": "Illinois Supreme Court"}
-{"qid": "73", "question": "In which court is the opinion cluster syllabus for < p > 1. infant. service of process. guardian ad litem. parent or guardian in this state. < / p > < p > service of process in tennessee on minor defendants to a suit in this state, when it has not been made to appear that there is no father, mother, or guardian in this state upon whom process may be served, does not give the court jurisdiction as to such minors, or authorize the appointment of a guardian ad litem for them. erwin v. carson, 54 miss. 282, cited. < / p > < p > 2. partneeship. services of partner. compensation therefor. < / p > < p > without an agreement authorizing it, a partner cannot charge the firm or co - partners for services. though such services are rendered in the firm business, this is not alone sufficient ; it is incumbent on the partner asserting a claim to show a contract or agreement by which he is entitled to compensation for services so rendered. < / p > < p > 3. same. evidence. statements of bookkeeper. hearsay. < / p > < p > in a suit against surviving partners by the representatives of a deceased partner, proof of statements made by a former bookkeeper of the firm, published?", "answer": "Mississippi Supreme Court"}
-{"qid": "74", "question": "In which court is the opinion cluster syllabus for < p > syllabus by the court. < / p > < p > bankruptcy \u2014 preference of creditors \u2014 case overruled. a conveyance of non - exempt property by a bankrupt to one of his creditors within four months prior to the filing of a petition in bankruptcy by or against him, made with the intent and purpose on the part of the bankrupt alone to hinder, delay or defraud his creditors, is prohibited by clause e of section 67 of the national bankrupt act ( 30 u. s. stat. at l,, ch. 541 ), and such conveyance may be avoided by the trustee appointed in the bankruptcy proceedings. ( sherman v. luckhardt, 65 kan. 610, 70 pac. 702, overruled. ) < / p > published?", "answer": "Supreme Court of Kansas"}
-{"qid": "75", "question": "Where is the opinion cluster syllabus for < p > 1. promissory note. collateral security. rights of assignee. his laches. indorser discharged. < / p > < p > m. held the promissory note of f. for $ 500, with the promissory note of s. to f., for $ 1, 500, as collateral security. s., knowing this fact, paid to f. the amount due on his ( s. \u2019 s ) note. subsequent to this payment, m. sold f. \u2019 s note to j., agent of t., and delivered with it the collateral note of s. j. held both notes, without suing, until the note of s. had become barred bv the statute of limitations, and soon thereafter died. the administratrix of his estate brought an action, for the use of ti, against m.., upon his indorsement on b. \u2019 s note. the court instructed the jury, in effect, that s. \u2019 s payment to b., knowing that his note had been hypothecated to m., was a nullity so far as the latter was concerned ; that m. could have compelled s. to pay the note again, and this published? Which court?", "answer": "Mississippi Supreme Court"}
-{"qid": "76", "question": "Can you tell me the court where the opinion cluster syllabus of < p > wills \u2014 probate \u2014 issue devisavit vel non \u2014 mutilated, paper. < / p > < p > 1. a decree of the orphans \u2019 court refusing an issue devisavit vel non, and affirming the admission of a writing to probate, will not be reversed where it is uncontroverted that the testator, possessing full testamentary capacity, executed the paper as his will in the presence of two subscribing witnesses, that shortly before his death he designated a box as the place where his will would be found, that after his death the will was found by the executor named therein in the place designated, with the first page tom off, and that after the statement made by the testator as to the place where he kept his will, neither he nor any one else had opened the box until after his death, < / p > < p > 2. in such a ease it is for the court to determine whether the writing was a valid testamentary paper. if it determines this question in the affirmative, questions as to whether all the provisions in the will are enforceable in view of the destruction of the first page, will be considered in later proceedings. < / is published?", "answer": "Supreme Court of Pennsylvania"}
-{"qid": "77", "question": "In which court is the opinion cluster syllabus for < p > \u25a0 master and servant - \u2014 injury to'servant \u2014 compensation act - ^ pebmanent partial disability \u2014 conclusiveness oe judgment. under rem. code, \u00a7 6604 - 5, providing that compensation under the workmen \u2019 s compensation act shall he made in a lump sum for \u201c permanent partial disability, \u201d which is defined as the loss of certain members \u201c or any other injury known in surgery to be permanent partial disability, \u201d the industrial insurance commission cannot, after a judgment of the superior court has determined that an injury to an employee suffering from hernia has resulted in \u201c permanent partial disability, \u201d refuse to make compensation in a lump sum because of its promulgated rules regarding hernia, which required the injured employee to submit to an \u2019 operation and take pay for loss of time only. < / p > published?", "answer": "Washington Supreme Court"}
-{"qid": "78", "question": "Where is the opinion cluster syllabus for < p > fraud \u2014 assignment of school - land, certificates \u2014 agency. in an action to recover school land, assignments of certificates of purchase of which were alleged to have been procured from the plaintiff by fraud, the evidence held to support the findings and judgment for the defendant. < / p > published? Which court?", "answer": "Supreme Court of Kansas"}
-{"qid": "79", "question": "Can you tell me the court where the opinion cluster syllabus of < p > patents ; interference ; bubden of pboof ; evidence ; originality ; employee and employee ; presumptions. < / p > < p > x. tbe burden of proof is cast heavily upon an applicant who is in interference with a prior patentee ; but where the applicant claims conception and disclosure to the patentee and there is but one reduction to practice, that of the patentee, and the testimony of the applicant is clear and unshaken by cross - examination, it is sufficient for a time to overcome such burden of proof and compel the patentee to account for his claim of the invention. < / p > < p > 2. when the burden of proof is upon a party to an interference, he cannot be said to have satisfied it where his testimony upon material points has been flatly contradicted by an apparently credible, well - informed and positive adversary ; but where such a conflict of testimony exists the surrounding facts and circumstances will be looked into, and are entitled to more or less weight and sometimes carry more than do the words of witnesses ; following beals v. binkenbiner, 12 app. d. c. 23. < / p > < p > 3. any unfavorable inference arising is published?", "answer": "Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit"}
-{"qid": "80", "question": "Can you tell me the count of dockets that have been processed in Columbia County Superior Court, Ga. court?", "answer": "8"}
-{"qid": "81", "question": "Can you tell me the count of dockets that have been processed in Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Green County court?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "82", "question": "In court Shelby County Court of Common Pleas, how many dockets have been handled?", "answer": "11"}
-{"qid": "83", "question": "How many court dockets have been handled in Michigan Superior Court, Detroit?", "answer": "9"}
-{"qid": "84", "question": "How many dockets have been processed in court Franklin County Court of Quarter Sessions?", "answer": "25"}
-{"qid": "85", "question": "What is the number of dockets processed in District Court, D. Virginia court?", "answer": "11"}
-{"qid": "86", "question": "How many court dockets have been handled in Girard Municipal Court?", "answer": "4"}
-{"qid": "87", "question": "How many court dockets have been handled in Warren County Municipal Court?", "answer": "4"}
-{"qid": "88", "question": "How many court dockets have been handled in Butler County Court of Quarter Sessions?", "answer": "9"}
-{"qid": "89", "question": "What is the number of dockets processed in Highland Circuit Court court?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "90", "question": "How many times has this opinion been referenced by others: < div > < center > < b > 481 so. 2d 83 ( 1986 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > paul h. cowart / building specialty and whiting national services, inc., appellants, < br > v. < br > annette cowart, appellee. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. bf - 374. < / center > < center > < p > < b > district court of appeal of florida, first district. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > january 3, 1986. < / center > < p > c. thomas ferrar, altamonte springs, for appellants. < / p > < p > bill mccabe of shepherd, mccabe & amp ; cooley and edward h. hurt, sr. of hurt, parrish & amp ; dalton, orlando, for appellee. < / p > < p > thompson, judge. < / p > < p > in this appeal the sole contention of the appellant employer / carrier is that the deputy commissioner ( deputy ) erred in calculating < span class = \" star - pagination?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "91", "question": "How many times has this opinion been referenced by others: < div > < center > < b > 773 p. 2d 1110 ( 1989 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re the marriage of carol aragon, f / k / a carol garcia, and < br > john benjamin garcia, sr., appellee, and concerning < br > las animas county department of social services, appellant. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. 88ca0343. < / center > < center > < p > < b > colorado court of appeals, div. c. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > april 13, 1989. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 1111 < / span > duane woodard, atty. gen., charles b. howe, chief deputy atty. gen., richard h. forman, sol. gen., anthony s. trumbly, asst. atty. gen., denver, for appellant. < / p > < p > no appearance for appellee. < / p > < p > enoch, < sup >?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "92", "question": "What is the number of opinions referencing this opinion: cite as : 583 u. s. _ _ _ _ ( 2017 ) 1 per curiam supreme court of the united states jefferson dunn, commissioner, alabama department of corrections v. vernon madison on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eleventh circuit no. 17 \u2013 193. decided november 6, 2017 per curiam. more than 30 years ago, vernon madison crept up be - hind police officer julius schulte and shot him twice in the head at close range. an alabama jury found madison guilty of capital murder. the trial court sentenced him to death. see ex parte madison, 718 so. 2d 104, 105 \u2013 106 ( 1998 ). in 2016, as madison \u2019 s execution neared, he petitioned the trial court for a suspension of his death sentence. he argued that, due to several recent strokes, he has become incompetent to be executed. the court held a hearing to receive testimony from two psychologists who had exam - ined madison and prepared reports concerning his compe - tence. the court \u2019 s appointed psychologist, dr. karl kirk - land, reported that, although madison may have \u201c suffered a significant decline post - stroke,... [ he ] understands the exact posture of?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "93", "question": "What is the number of opinions referencing this opinion: < p class = \" case _ cite \" > 489 f. 2d 754 < / p > < p class = \" parties \" > endicott < br > v. < br > merdie boggs & amp ; son, inc. < / p > < p class = \" docket \" > 73 - 1688 < / p > < p class = \" court \" > united states court of appeals fourth circuit < / p > < p class = \" date \" > 1 / 22 / 74 < / p > < div class = \" num \" id = \" p1 \" > < span class = \" num \" > 1 < / span > < p class = \" indent \" > s. d. w. va. < / p > < / div > < p class = \" indent \" > vacated and remanded < / p >?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "94", "question": "How many opinions are citing this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 386 pa. 485 ( 1956 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > commonwealth < br > v. < br > leamer, appellant. < / h1 > < / center > < center > < p > < b > supreme court of pennsylvania. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > argued september 24, 1956. < / center > < center > november 12, 1956. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 486 < / span > before stern, c. j., jones, bell, chidsey, musmanno and arnold, jj. < / p > < p > < i > richard a. carothers, < / i > with him < i > gerald s. turner, < / i > for appellant. < / p > < p > < i > park h. loose, < / i > district attorney, with him < i > frank b. warfel, < / i > first assistant district attorney, for appellee. < / p > < p > opinion by mr. justice arnold,?", "answer": "9"}
-{"qid": "95", "question": "How many opinions are citing this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 45 ill. app. 3d 555 ( 1977 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < b > 359 n. e. 2d 1155 < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > joseph l. kitching, plaintiff - appellant, < br > v. < br > loeta r. ridings, defendant - appellee. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. 76 - 75. < / center > < center > < p > < b > illinois appellate court second district ( 1st division ). < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > opinion filed february 1, 1977. < / center > < p > robert d. greenwalt, of harold spelman & amp ; assoc., of chicago, for appellant. < / p > < p > gerald m. sheridan, jr., of wheaton, and robert f. casey, of geneva, for appellee. < / p > < p > order affirmed. < / p > < p > mr. justice guild delivered the opinion of the court : < / p > < p > on october 23?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "96", "question": "How many opinions are citing this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 618 f. supp. 2d 96 ( 2009 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > in re : neurontin marketing, sales practices and products liability litigation. < br > this document relates to : bentley v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 05 - 11997 - pbs. bulger v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 07 - 11426 - pbs. dixon v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 05 - 11998 - pbs. mcgee v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 05 - 12593 - pbs. owens v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 05 - 11017 - pbs. pursey v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 07 - 10106 - pbs. roberson v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 05 - 12001 - pbs. shearer v. pfizer, inc., et al., ca no. 07 - 114?", "answer": "5"}
-{"qid": "97", "question": "What is the number of opinions referencing this opinion: < div > < center > < b > 452 pa. 482 ( 1973 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > commonwealth ex rel. specter ( et al., appellant ) < br > v. < br > moak. < / h1 > < / center > < center > < p > < b > supreme court of pennsylvania. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > argued april 30, 1973. < / center > < center > july 2, 1973. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 483 < / span > before jones, c. j., eagen, o'brien, roberts, pomeroy, nix and manderino, jj. < / p > < p > < i > arlen specter, < / i > district attorney, with him < i > martin h. belsky, < / i > assistant district attorney, for appellants. < / p > < p > < i > martin weinberg, < / i > city solicitor, with him < i > sheldon l. albert, < / i > deputy city solicitor,?", "answer": "11"}
-{"qid": "98", "question": "How many opinions are citing this opinion: < p > this was an action by anna b. bray et al., they being the children in esse of adam helfrich, deceased, to construe the last will of the decedent and to require the appellee, old national bank in evansville, as successor trustee of the trust created by decedent's last will, to exercise certain discretionary powers granted by item one of the codicil to said will and to distribute to appellants the stock of the helfrich lumber < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * page 509 < / span > and manufacturing company, inc., said stock being a part of the assets of the trust. < / p > < p > the cause was tried to the court below and upon request of appellants, plaintiffs below, the court made special findings of facts and stated conclusions of law thereon to the effect that the law was with the appellees, whereupon judgment was awarded to appellees. < / p > < p > appellants assign as error : < / p > < p > ( a ) that the court erred in its conclusions of law numbered 1, 2 and 3 stated upon the special findings of facts?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "99", "question": "Can you tell me the count of opinions that cite this opinion: < p > the defendant was charged in the district court of osage county with the crime of assault with a dangerous weapon, was convicted and sentenced to serve a term of two years in the penitentiary, and has appealed. < / p > < p > the first assignment of error is that the court erred in giving instruction no. 10, which is as follows : < / p > < p > \" you are instructed that if you find from the evidence, facts and circumstances in proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant herein armed himself for the purpose of making an assault upon the prosecuting witness, with the intention then and there existing in his mind to kill or do great bodily harm to the prosecuting witness, and if you further find that under such situation he pointed the gun at the prosecuting witness with the result that said gun was accidentally discharged, then and under such circumstances the fact, if you find it to be a fact & # 8212 ; that said gun was accidentally discharged would be no defense to the commission of the crime charged in the information. \" < / p > < p > this instruction should be considered together with all the instructions given by the court, and especially with instruction no. 9, which was as follows : < / p?", "answer": "9"}
-{"qid": "100", "question": "In how many different courts has the case Allen v. Holder been adjudicated?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "101", "question": "The case United States v. Lebon has been through judgement in how many different courts?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "102", "question": "How many times has the case Rodgers & Hagerty, Inc. v. City of New York been judged in different courts?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "103", "question": "How many times has the case Jacoby v. State been judged in different courts?", "answer": "8"}
-{"qid": "104", "question": "The case Bush v. Brunswick Corp. has been judged in how many distinct courts?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "105", "question": "How many separate courts have passed judgement on the case United States v. Duardi?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "106", "question": "In how many different courts has the case Thompson v. Edward D. Jones & Co. been adjudicated?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "107", "question": "The case National Westminster Bank, PLC v. United States has been judged in how many distinct courts?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "108", "question": "In how many different courts has the case Harris v. Wall been adjudicated?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "109", "question": "In how many different courts has the case Bartley v. People been adjudicated?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "110", "question": "How many views are included in the opinion clusters about Carlos Daniel Fernandez v. State?", "answer": "5"}
-{"qid": "111", "question": "Can you tell me the number of opinions included in the opinion clusters concerning Justin Knopp v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "112", "question": "How many views are included in the opinion clusters about People v. Wylie?", "answer": "9"}
-{"qid": "113", "question": "Can you tell me the number of opinions included in the opinion clusters concerning Fiess v. State Farm Lloyds?", "answer": "6"}
-{"qid": "114", "question": "What is the count of opinions in the opinion clusters related to Austin Cole Long v. the State of Texas?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "115", "question": "How many views are included in the opinion clusters about Kirt Wren v. Southfield Rehabilitation Co?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "116", "question": "What is the count of opinions in the opinion clusters related to Cohen, Avie E. v. Fischer Investment?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "117", "question": "How many opinions are contained in the opinion clusters about Jones v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.?", "answer": "10"}
-{"qid": "118", "question": "How many views are included in the opinion clusters about Gray v. Ellis?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "119", "question": "How many opinions are contained in the opinion clusters about In Re: Order Amending Rule 1910.16-6 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure?", "answer": "4"}
-{"qid": "120", "question": "What is the number of opinions in the opinion cluster having syllabus: < p > 1. recognizance \u2014 may he forfeited at succeeding term. where the cause in which a party is recognized to appear for trial is not tried, but continued by order, or by operation of law, a forfeiture may be declared, even though two terms have elapsed from the term to which the principal was required to appear. < / p > < p > 2. same \u2014 construed as to requiring appearance at succeeding term. a recognizance, conditioned that the principal shall be and appear before the court, etc., on the first day of the term thereof, to be holden at, etc., to answer unto a certain crime, ( stating it, ) and abide the order of the court, and not depart without leave, requires the accused to appear on the first day of the next term, and from day to day during the term, and from term to term, and from day to day of each term, until the final sentence or order of the court, to answer the specified charge. < / p > < p > 3. same \u2014 payment of costs essential to setting aside forfeiture. the statute provides that no forfeiture of recognizance shall be?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "121", "question": "How many thoughts are included in the opinion cluster with syllabus: < p > 1. mandamus. acts of insurance commissioner. judicial discretion. < / p > < p > mandamus will not lie to review tbe judicial discretion of tbe insurance commissioner in granting a license to an insurance company to do business in tbe state on tbe ground that its policies, passed upon by tbe commissioner, violate a statute ; nor, in tbe absence of evidence dehors tbe policies, to compel a revocation of tbe license. < / p > < p > 2. insurance. contracts. discrimination. income clause. code 1906, \u00a7 2600. < / p > < p > code 1906, \u00a7 2600, prohibiting discrimination in dividends or benefits to accrue on an insurance policy, is violated by policies stipulating for tbe return to tbe insurer of an annual income, however small, during a designated time, \u2022 although tbe obligation purports to be based on a consideration. < / p >?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "122", "question": "How many thoughts are included in the opinion cluster with syllabus: < p > encroachments on street \u2014 injunction \u2014 public nuisance \u2014 damages to public and private eights \u2014 abatement of nuisance \u2014 townsite on public domain \u2014 entry of \u2014 duty of mayor \u2014 platting townsite \u2014 bights of occupants \u2014 bights of general public in unoccupied lots and streets \u2014 duties and powers of mayor and surveyor \u2014 trust imposed. < / p > < p > 1. the city of lewiston was located on the publie domain of the united states, and under the provisions of section 2387 of the bevised statutes of the united \u2022 states was entered by the mayor in trust for the several use and benefit of the occupants thereof according to their respective interests. said section of the statute provides that the execution of such trust as to the disposal of the lots in such town and the proceeds of the sale thereof must be conducted under such regulations as may be prescribed by the legislative authority of the territory. < / p > < p > 2. in compliance with the provisions of said section, the territorial legislature passed an act entitled, \u201c an act to provide for the survey, platting and disposal of the land in the city of lewiston, nez perce county, idaho, pursuant to?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "123", "question": "What is the number of opinions in the opinion cluster having syllabus: < p > syllabus by the court. < / p > < p > 1. oral contract \u2014 employment during life \u2014 statute of frauds. an agreement to - provide a person - with employment during his life is not required by the statute of frauds to be in writing and signed by the party to be charged, since its performance will not necessarily extend over a year. < / p > < p > 2. injured employee \u2014 contract for settlement misread \u2014 important omissions \u2014 employee not chargeable with notice of omissions. if an injured employee, who is too weak to read, is induced to sign a contract releasing his employer from liability, by the false representation that it provides for his future employment, the contract being read aloud as though it contained such provision, constructive notice of its real contents is not imparted to him by the fact that his wife, being present as his agent, to aid him in the matter, omitted to read it. < / p > < p > 3. same \u2014 receipt \u2014 not signed by employer \u2014 contents misrepresented by employer \u2014 may be reformed. a writing acknowledging the receipt of money by an injured employee, and in consideration thereof releasing the employer from liability, although signed only by the employee?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "124", "question": "How many thoughts are included in the opinion cluster with syllabus: < p > 1, limitation \u2014 when statute begins to run \u2014 on foreclosure of mortgage. as long as the relation of mortgagor and mortgagee exists, the statute of limitations will not run to bar the action of ejectment by the mortgagee against the mortgagor, or his heirs after his death. it will not commence t\u00b0 i'u11 in favor of the mortgagor or his heirs until that relation is terminated in some one of the modes known to the law. the recovery of judgment on scire facias to foreclose will not terminate such relation. < / p > < p > 2. same. where a mortgagee recovered judgment on scire facias against the heirs of the mortgagor to foreclose a mortgage, under which the mortgaged premises were sold, and he became the purchaser : held, that the statute of limitations did not begin to run in favor of the heirs and widow in possession against the purchaser and those succeeding to his rights, until after the time allowed by law for redemption had expired, and the purchaser was entitled to a deed for the premises ; for until then all the rights of the mortgagee, his heirs and assignees, were not foreclosed?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "125", "question": "What is the number of opinions in the opinion cluster having syllabus: < p > 1. cities and villages \u2014 injury from defective sidewalks \u2014 duty and liability in respect thereto. on principles of common law, an action lies - against a municipal corporation, for damages resulting from its negligence in keeping public streets and sidewalks in repair, where the duty to make the repairs is fully declared, and adequate means are furnished the city to perform the duty. < / p > < p > 2. a city incorporated under the general incorporation law owes the duty of keeping its streets, sidewalks, etc., in repair, and is clothed with adequate - powers and means for that purpose. < / p > < p > 3. same \u2014 as to the character of use of a street or sidewalk allowable, in view of the liability of the municipality. the statute does not impose - the duty upon incorporated cities to keep their streets and sidewalks in proper - repair for travelers only, but for all persons lawfully using the same, without regard to the motives and objects of those passing over them. persons using - them for recreation or amusement not unlawful, or from mere idle curiosity, are as much within the protection of the law as those in the pursuit of their legitimate and necessary business. < / p > < p > 4. so a city incorporated under the?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "126", "question": "How many thoughts are included in the opinion cluster with syllabus: < p > gaming. \u2014 it is not a crime, under penal code, section 330, making it an offense to operate any banking or percentage game played with any device \u201c for money, cheeks, credit or other representative of value, \u201d to set up and operate a slot machine on which games are played, unless played for money, cheeks, credits or other representative of value, and, if played for something not included in these words, it is not a crime. 1 < / p > < p > gaming. \u2014 penal code, section 330, making it an offense for anyone to operate any banking or percentage game played with any device for money, cheeks, credit, or other representative of value, adopted in 1872, prior to the existence of cigar slot machines, when considered in connection with section 331, prohibiting the use of any house for gambling, prohibited by section 330, and section 4, providing that the penal code is to be construed according to the fair import of its terms, does not make it an offense to operate a slot machine on which games are played for cigars. < / p >?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "127", "question": "How many thoughts are included in the opinion cluster with syllabus: < p > water bights. \u2014 a deed by a prior appropriator of water conveyed \u201c all of his right to the use of all the waters of d. creek. said waters to be taken out at a point.... about one mile above the head of s. \u2019 s old ditch, and tapping said creek where the b. go. taps said d. creek..... to have and to hold.... the first right to the use of all the waters \u201d thereof. the grantor at that time owned five ditches tapping the stream below the named point of inflow, through which ditches he thereafter continued to divert water, with the grantee \u2019 s acquiescence. considerable water still flowed in the stream below the point named, it being from seepage, springs and other sources. held, that the intention was to convey a first right only to the point mentioned, and, hence, that the waters below did not become subject to appropriation. < / p > < p > witness. \u2014 it is not error to exclude a question calling for a mere repetition of testimony. < / p >?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "128", "question": "What is the number of opinions in the opinion cluster having syllabus: < p > syllabus. < / p > < p > 1st. the averment stated that ah information in order to negative prescription - was limited to the allegation that the defendant fled from justice. < / p > < p > 2nd. the affirmative of the question at issue was assumed by the state. the defendant was not bound, in order to sustain his plea of prescription, to \u25a0 prove that he was not a fugitive from justice, as charged. < / p > < p > srd. relative to the averment negativing prescription on the ground that knowledge of the crime'was not given to an officer having authority to, direct the prosecution, the court heretofore held that the burden was on the defendant, who could easily prove the affirmative, that an officer was at least aware \u25a0 of the \u2022 charge. > < / p > < p > 4th. as relates to the averment that defendant was a fugitive from justice, there \u2022 is no direct interchangeable expression under which a negative might be changed to an affirmative and proof required of the affirmative proposition. hither he was a fugitive or he was not. if he was a fugitive, - it was for the state to prove it, and not for the?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "129", "question": "Can you tell me the quantity of opinions in the opinion cluster with syllabus: < p > 1. pleading, declaration to be construed against pleader. < / p > < p > a declaration is to be construed most strongly against the pleader, and the character of a contract set out as a part of it cannot be altered by any allegations or conclusions. < / p > < p > 2. negligence. light company held not liable for death of customer \u2019 s employee caused by failure of lights. < / p > < p > where a company contracted merely to furnish electrical energy for power to the operator of a linter washing and drying factory, it was not liable for the death of an employee in such factory, who, when the lights went out on account of a failure of power, fell into a vat of boiling chemicals, there being no duty on the power company toward the employee either as the agent of his employer or otherwise. < / p > < p > 3. pleading. plea in bar setting up discharge in bankruptcy and con - concluding to county a joinder of issue if valid at all. < / p > < p > in an action for the death of a servant against his employer and a light and power company whose negligence caused the death where defendant employer, set up his discharge in bankruptcy by?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "130", "question": "Can you tell me the total number of opinions in the opinion cluster containing < p > i concur in the foregoing opinion of mr. justice gibson except for what is said therein regarding \" color of title. \" < / p > < p > the court's declaration in the case of pritchard petroleum co. v. farmers co - op. oil supply co., mont., < cross _ reference > 161 p. 2d 526 < / cross _ reference >, < cross _ reference > 531 < / cross _ reference >, that \" the tanks were returned to said tract in good faith under color of title and in the mistaken belief that it was the legal owner of said tract \" cannot be shrugged away as obiter dictum. < / p > < p > an examination of the questions presented in the case of pritchard petroleum co. v. farmers co - op. oil supply co., supra, reveals that the court was required to consider and pass upon the question of the title of the respondents. in the course of this consideration the court made the statement above quoted. perhaps it was not necessary to the decision to declare that the tanks were placed on the land \" under color of title. \" perhaps it can be argued that it was enough to say that good faith was all that?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "131", "question": "What is the number of opinions included in the opinion cluster involving < div > < center > < b > 204 mich. app. 616 ( 1994 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < b > 516 n. w. 2d 527 < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > john's corvette care, inc < br > v. < br > city of dearborn < / h1 > < / center > < center > docket no. 152265. < / center > < center > < p > < b > michigan court of appeals. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > submitted january 20, 1994, at detroit. < / center > < center > decided april 19, 1994, at 9 : 15 a. m. < / center > < p > < i > richard r. nelson, < / i > for the plaintiff. < / p > < p > < i > laurie m. sabon, < / i > for the defendant. < / p > < p > before : cavanagh, p. j., and marilyn kelly and j. r. ernst, < sup > [ * ] < / sup > jj. < / p > < p?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "132", "question": "What is the number of opinions included in the opinion cluster involving < p > < em > in equity. < / em > & # 8212 ; the bill stated that the plaintiff and defendant were citizens of north carolina, that the plaintiff, being desirous of obtaining good land in this state, made himself acquainted with vacant lands for the purpose of locating for himself. that the defendant came to his house, and appeared to be desirous < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * page 72 < / span > of getting information from him for the purpose of locating. < / p > < p > the defendant urged the plaintiff to make a contract with him, which was accordingly done in writing under seal ; the plaintiff was to furnish locations, and the defendant was to use his best endeavors to enter them, and pay the purchase - money into john armstrong's office. < / p > < p > each person to have half the lands. < / p > < p > the contract was entered into on the 29th of september, 1783. the plaintiff then furnished the defendant with eight different locations, the situation of which was pointed out, amounting to 5000 acres. that these lands were the best he could acquire a knowledge of after eighteen months'exertions for that purpose. avers that the?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "133", "question": "Can you tell me the total number of opinions in the opinion cluster containing < div > < center > < b > 984 s. w. 2d 357 ( 1999 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > imogene warner and carroll warner, appellants, < br > v. < br > orange county, texas, appellee. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. 09 - 97 - 169 cv < / center > < center > < p > < b > court of appeals of texas, beaumont. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > submitted november 12, 1998. < / center > < center > decided january 21, 1999. < / center > < p > mike jacobellis, tonahill, hile, leister & amp ; jacobellis, beaumont, for appellant. < / p > < p > john kimbrough, county attorney, john mcelroy, assistant county attorney, orange, for appellee. < / p > < p > before walker, c. j., and burgess and stover, jj. < / p > < p > < / p > < h2 > opinion < / h2 > < p > burgess, justice.?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "134", "question": "Can you tell me the total number of opinions in the opinion cluster containing court of appeals of virginia present : judges benton, elder and senior judge cole argued at richmond, virginia sherri ann polston, s / k / a sherri anne polston opinion by v. record no. 1064 - 96 - 2 judge larry g. elder may 27, 1997 commonwealth of virginia from the circuit court of chesterfield county william r. shelton, judge ned m. mikula ( rudy, evans & mikula, on briefs ), for appellant. monica s. mcelyea, assistant attorney general ( james s. gilmore, iii, attorney general, on brief ), for appellee. sherri ann polston ( appellant ) appeals her conviction of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. she contends that the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress evidence obtained during a search of her apartment. she argues that the magistrate lacked a substantial basis for finding probable cause to issue the search warrant for her apartment. for the reasons that follow, we affirm. i. facts on january 6, 1995, detective stuart graham powell of the chesterfield county police participated in the arrest of an 1 unidentified person ( informant ). following his arrest, 1 the gender of the informant is not disclosed in the record. informant will be referred?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "135", "question": "What is the count of opinions within the opinion cluster including the opinion < p > < center > * * * * * * * * * * * < / center > the full commission reviewed the prior opinion and award, based upon the record of the proceedings before the deputy commissioner and the briefs and oral argument before the full commission. the appealing party has not shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence ; receive further evidence ; rehear the parties or their representatives ; or amend the opinion and award. accordingly, the full commission affirms, with minor modifications, the opinion and award of the deputy commissioner. < / p > < p > < center > * * * * * * * * * * * < / center > the full commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties in a pre - trial agreement and at the hearing before the deputy commissioner as : < / p > < p > < center > < u > stipulations < / u > < / center > 1. on all relevant dates, the parties were subject to the north carolina workers'compensation act. < / p > < p > 2. on all relevant dates, an employee - employer relationship existed between plaintiff - employee and defendant - employer. < / p > < p > 3. the?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "136", "question": "What is the count of opinions within the opinion cluster including the opinion < div > < center > < b > 898 p. 2d 232 ( 1995 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < b > 135 or. app. 438 < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > kay e. ballinger, appellant - cross - respondent, < br > v. < br > klamath pacific corporation, an oregon corporation, robert stewart, respondents - cross - appellants, and < br > michael pearce and kevin mahoney, respondents. < br > margaret a. sutfin, appellant - cross - respondent, < br > v. < br > klamath pacific corporation, an oregon corporation, robert stewart, respondents - cross - appellants, and < br > michael pearce and kevin mahoney, respondents. < / h1 > < / center > < center > 9002597cv ; 9002598cv ; ca a77171 ( control ) ; ca a77172. < / center > < center > < p > < b > court of appeals of oregon. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > argued and submitted august 1,?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "137", "question": "Can you tell me the total number of opinions in the opinion cluster containing < div > < center > < b > 424 s. w. 2d 594 ( 1968 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > blue grass restaurant company, inc., et al., appellants, < br > v. < br > herbert r. franklin, appellee. < br > blue grass restaurant company, inc., appellant, < br > v. < br > eastland investment company, appellee. < / h1 > < / center > < center > < p > < b > court of appeals of kentucky. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > february 16, 1968. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 595 < / span > william h. fortune, harbison, kessinger, lisle & amp ; bush, john l. davis, michael l. ades, stoll, keenon & amp ; park, lexington, for appellants. < / p > < p > amos h. eblen, eblen, howard & amp ; milner, lexington, g. a. chadwick, jr.,?", "answer": "3"}
-{"qid": "138", "question": "Can you tell me the total number of opinions in the opinion cluster containing < div class = \" courtcasedochead col - 12 \" > < div class = \" caseinfo \" > < div class = \" casename \" > < div class = \" fullcasename \" > pierre boulez, petitioner v. commissioner of internal revenue, respondent < / div > < div class = \" shortcasename \" party1 = \" boulez \" party2 = \" commissioner \" > boulez v. commissioner < / div > < / div > < div class = \" docketnumber \" > docket no. 12705 - 79 < / div > < div class = \" courtinfo \" > < courtname > united states tax court < / courtname > < jurisdiction > < jurissystem normalizedlongname = \" united states \" normalizedshortname = \" us \" > < / jurissystem > < / jurisdiction > < / div > < div class = \" citations \" > < span class = \" citeforthisresource \" pagescheme = \" t. c. \" > 83 t. c. 584 < span > ; < / span > < / span > < span class?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "139", "question": "Can you tell me the total number of opinions in the opinion cluster containing < div class = \" courtcasedochead col - 12 \" > < div class = \" caseinfo \" > < div class = \" casename \" > < div class = \" fullcasename \" > edith pulitzer moore, petitioner, < emphasis typestyle = \" it \" > v. < / emphasis > commissioner of internal revenue, respondent. < / div > < div class = \" shortcasename \" party1 = \" moore \" party2 = \" commissioner \" > moore v. commissioner < / div > < / div > < div class = \" docketnumber \" > docket no. 89702. < / div > < div class = \" courtinfo \" > < courtname > united states board of tax appeals < / courtname > < jurisdiction > < jurissystem normalizedlongname = \" united states \" normalizedshortname = \" us \" > < / jurissystem > < / jurisdiction > < / div > < div class = \" citations \" > < span class = \" citeforthisresource \" pagescheme = \" b. t. a. \" > 40 b. t. a. 1019?", "answer": "2"}
-{"qid": "140", "question": "In which court is this opinion (< div > < center > < b > 219 pa. superior ct. 79 ( 1971 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > commonwealth < br > v. < br > sanders, appellant. < / h1 > < / center > < center > < p > < b > superior court of pennsylvania. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > argued september 21, 1970. < / center > < center > june 22, 1971. < / center > < p > before wright, p. j., watkins, montgomery, jacobs, hoffman, spaulding, and cercone, jj. < / p > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 80 < / span > < i > john w. packel, < / i > assistant defender, with him < i > vincent j. ziccardi, < / i > defender, for appellant. < / p > < p > < i > milton m. stein, < / i > assistant district attorney, with him < i > charles a. klein, < / i > assistant district attorney, < i > james d. crawford, < / i >) published?", "answer": "Superior Court of Pennsylvania"}
-{"qid": "141", "question": "Which court is this opinion (< div > < center > < b > 244 s. w. 3d 771 ( 2008 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > william bauman, claimant / appellant, < br > v. < br > united parcel service, employer / respondent, and < br > liberty mutual fire insurance co., insurer / respondent. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. ed 89824. < / center > < center > < p > < b > missouri court of appeals, eastern district, division one. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > january 29, 2008. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 772 < / span > james s. haupt, richard j. fitzgerald, st. louis, mo, for appellant. < / p > < p > maureen l. cary, st. louis, mo, for respondents. < / p > < p > before kathianne knaup crane, p. j., robert g. dowd, jr., j., and kenneth m. romines, j. < / p) published?", "answer": "Missouri Court of Appeals"}
-{"qid": "142", "question": "This opinion (< p > david s. nelson, esq. village attorney, gouverneur < / p > < p > the school district for which you serve as attorney has prepared written reports concerning alleged criminal acts committed by students on school property and has submitted these reports to your village police department. in these reports, the district stated that it did not wish to prosecute the students involved in these incidents. the students have not, in fact, been prosecuted. the reports have been filed by the police department and entered in the department's records in the same manner as any other complaint alleging criminal misconduct. based upon your letter and a telephone conversation with this office, you ask whether the police department, upon request of the school district, must return the reports to the district and expunge such reports from its records. < / p > < p > the records of a village police department are public records and may not be disposed of or expunged except as prescribed by statute ( see, < em > matter < / em > < em > of weisberg v police department of village of lynbrook, < / em > < cross _ reference > 46 misc. 2d 846 < / cross _ reference > [ sup ct, nassau co, 1965 ] ; <), which court has published it?", "answer": "New York Attorney General Reports"}
-{"qid": "143", "question": "Which court is this opinion (< div > < center > < b > 103 f. supp. 2d 1129 ( 2000 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > ag acceptance corporation, as assignee of ag services of america, inc., plaintiff, < br > v. < br > lowell f. nelson and sandra j. nelson, defendants. < / h1 > < / center > < center > civ. no. 99 - 1026 ( dfw / rl ). < / center > < center > < p > < b > united states district court, d. minnesota. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > march 17, 2000. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 1130 < / span > jon richard brakke, vogel weir hunke & amp ; mccormick, fargo, nd, for plaintiff. < / p > < p > robert lorne russell, arverson lundeen & amp ; hoff, fergus falls, mn, for defendants. < / p > < p > frank, district judge. < / p > < p > after review and absent objection, the recommended ruling) published?", "answer": "District Court, D. Minnesota"}
-{"qid": "144", "question": "Can you identify the court that published this opinion (< div > people v hamilton ( 2017 ny slip op 05460 ) < table width = \" 80 % \" border = \" 1 \" cellspacing = \" 2 \" cellpadding = \" 5 \" align = \" center \" > < tr > < td align = \" center \" > < b > people v hamilton < / b > < / td > < / tr > < tr > < td align = \" center \" > 2017 ny slip op 05460 < / td > < / tr > < tr > < td align = \" center \" > decided on july 5, 2017 < / td > < / tr > < tr > < td align = \" center \" > appellate division, second department < / td > < / tr > < tr > < td align = \" center \" > published by new york state law reporting bureau pursuant to judiciary law \u00a7 431. < / td > < / tr > < tr > < td align = \" center \" > this opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the official reports. < / td > < / tr > < / table > < br > < br > decided on july 5, 2017 supreme court of the state of new york appellate division, second judicial department <)?", "answer": "Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York"}
-{"qid": "145", "question": "In which court is this opinion (published united states court of appeals for the fourth circuit no. 16 - 4313 united states of america, plaintiff \u2013 appellee, v. william todd chamberlain, defendant \u2013 appellant. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - national association of criminal defense lawyers ; cato institute, amici supporting appellant. appeal from the united states district court for the eastern district of north carolina, at raleigh. malcolm j. howard, senior district judge. ( 5 : 14\u2212cr\u221200128\u2212h\u22122 ) submitted : july 31, 2017 decided : august 18, 2017 before gregory, chief judge, and wilkinson, niemeyer, motz, traxler, king, shedd, duncan, agee, keenan, wynn, diaz, floyd, thacker, and harris, circuit judges. vacated by published opinion. judge wynn wrote the opinion, in which chief judge gregory and judges wilkinson, niemeyer, motz, traxler, king, shedd, duncan, agee, keenan, diaz, floyd, thacker, and harris joined. argued : elliot sol abrams, cheshire) published?", "answer": "Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit"}
-{"qid": "146", "question": "Which court is this opinion (< p class = \" case _ cite \" > 889 f. 2d 1037 < / p > < p class = \" parties \" > otto l. fox, petitioner, < br > v. < br > director, office of workers compensation programs, united < br > states department of labor, respondent. < / p > < p class = \" docket \" > no. 88 - 7742. < / p > < p class = \" court \" > united states court of appeals, < br > eleventh circuit. < / p > < p class = \" date \" > dec. 6, 1989. < / p > < div class = \" prelims \" > < p class = \" indent \" > william g. veitch, birmingham, ala., john c. rockette, bessemer, ala., for petitioner. < / p > < p class = \" indent \" > petition for review of an order of the office of workers compensation, u. s. department of labor ( alabama case ). < / p > < p class = \" indent \" > before tjoflat, chief judge, clark, circuit judge and smith < a class = \" footnote \" href =) published?", "answer": "Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit"}
-{"qid": "147", "question": "Which court is this opinion (< div > < center > < b > 382 s. c. 397 ( 2009 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < b > 675 s. e. 2d 783 < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > bessie c. pringle and burdy pringle, appellants, < br > v. < br > slr, inc. of summerton, d / b / a knights inn, respondent. < / h1 > < / center > < center > no. 4513. < / center > < center > < p > < b > court of appeals of south carolina. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > heard january 6, 2009. < / center > < center > decided february 27, 2009. < / center > < center > rehearing denied may 4, 2009. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 399 < / span > john eagle miles, michael mckinney jordan, both of sumter, for appellants. < / p > < p > marvin e. mcmillan, jr., of sumter,) published?", "answer": "Court of Appeals of South Carolina"}
-{"qid": "148", "question": "Can you identify the court that published this opinion (< div > < center > < b > 523 a. 2d 585 ( 1987 ) < / b > < / center > < center > < h1 > lester a. olson et al. < br > v. < br > rene n. albert, sr. et al. < br > jeannine g. albert < br > v. < br > rene n. albert, jr. et al. < / h1 > < / center > < center > < p > < b > supreme judicial court of maine. < / b > < / p > < / center > < center > argued march 4, 1987. < / center > < center > decided april 2, 1987. < / center > < p > < span class = \" star - pagination \" > * 586 < / span > albert l. bernier, ( orally ), marden, dubord, bernier & amp ; stevens, waterville, for plaintiffs. < / p > < p > michael e. seitzinger, john c. nivison ( orally ), pierce, atwood, scribner, allen, smith & amp ; lancaster, augusta, for rene albert, jr. < / p > < p)?", "answer": "Supreme Judicial Court of Maine"}
-{"qid": "149", "question": "This opinion (< p > this is an appeal from a judgment of the district court of bryan county, and is now before this court on motion to dismiss the appeal upon the grounds the appeal was not filed in this court in six months allowed by law in which to file the same. < / p > < p > the judgment was rendered in the trial court january 30, 1929. the motion for new trial was overruled on march 4, 1929. the time in which to appeal expired september 4, 1929. the petition in error with case - made attached was filed in this court september 5, 1929, one day after the expiration of the time allowed by law in which to perfect the appeal, and this court is without jurisdiction to review the judgment of the trial court in this cause. verschoyle v. mcdaniels, < cross _ reference > 127 okla. 166 < / cross _ reference >, < cross _ reference > 260 p. 55 < / cross _ reference > ; gilmore v. smith, < cross _ reference > 93 okla. 4 < / cross _ reference >, < cross _ reference > 219 p. 92 < / cross _ reference > ; wagnon v. davison, < cross _ reference > 79 okla. 209), which court has published it?", "answer": "Supreme Court of Oklahoma"}
-{"qid": "150", "question": "What is the court often mentioned by judges in court Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit?", "answer": "Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit"}
-{"qid": "151", "question": "What is the court often mentioned by judges in court Louisiana Attorney General Reports?", "answer": "Supreme Court of Louisiana"}
-{"qid": "152", "question": "Which is the court frequently cited by judges in court District Court, M.D. North Carolina?", "answer": "Supreme Court of the United States"}
-{"qid": "153", "question": "What is the court often mentioned by judges in court District Court, D. Montana?", "answer": "Supreme Court of the United States"}
-{"qid": "154", "question": "Which court do judges in court Superior Court of Delaware commonly reference?", "answer": "Supreme Court of Delaware"}
-{"qid": "155", "question": "What is the preferred court to cite of judges in court United States Special Tribunal of Texas?", "answer": "Texas Supreme Court"}
-{"qid": "156", "question": "What court is usually referenced by judges in court District Court, D. Guam?", "answer": "Supreme Court of the United States"}
-{"qid": "157", "question": "Which court do judges in court Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Tenth Circuit commonly reference?", "answer": "Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit"}
-{"qid": "158", "question": "What is the preferred court to cite of judges in court United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. West Virginia?", "answer": "Supreme Court of the United States"}
-{"qid": "159", "question": "What is the court often mentioned by judges in court District Court, D. Wyoming?", "answer": "Supreme Court of the United States"}
-{"qid": "160", "question": "Can the sentence given be validated with the given case? Sentence: To succeed on summary judgment in reliance on an affirmative defense, the moving party must establish beyond peradventure all of the essential elements of the \"defense to warrant judgment in [its] favor.\", case: Martin v. United States.", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "161", "question": "Does the provided case support the provided sentence? Sentence: It does not matter that \"the environmental and health injuries claimed by [Ms. Dengel] are not directly related to the constitutional attack on the [CRA].\", case: Euchner-USA, Inc. v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co..", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "162", "question": "Does the provided case support the provided sentence? Sentence: Under both Pennsylvania and New Jersey law, our role in interpreting an insurance policy is to \"ascertain the intent of the parties as manifested by the language of the written instrument.\", case: Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc..", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "163", "question": "Can we find backing for the sentence: The Supreme Court and this court have repeatedly \"held that environmental plaintiffs adequately allege injury in fact when they aver that they use the affected area and are persons for whom the aesthetic and recreational values of the area will be lessened by the challenged activity.\", in the case: United States v. Pearce?", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "164", "question": "Can the sentence given be validated with the given case? Sentence: Whether a search was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment is a question of law which is reviewed de novo., case: Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Indus. Pension Fund.", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "165", "question": "Can we find backing for the sentence: Proof of scienter requires \"a showing of either conscious intent to defraud or 'a high degree of recklessness.'\", in the case: Huff v. United States?", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "166", "question": "Is the given sentence supported by the given case? Sentence: If she has direct evidence of discrimination, the court does not wade into the McDonnell Douglas test,4 but instead the burden shifts to Performance to \"prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the same decision would have been made regardless of the discriminatory animus.\", case: United States v. Harris.", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "167", "question": "Is the sentence: If the employee establishes a prima facie retaliation claim, \"the burden shifts to the employer to state a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for its decision.\", corroborated by the case: Hall v. Hall?", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "168", "question": "Is the sentence: [O]bjects falling in the plain view of an officer who has a right to be in the position to have that view are subject to seizure and may be introduced in evidence., corroborated by the case: Harris v. United States?", "answer": "Yes"}
-{"qid": "169", "question": "Can the sentence given be validated with the given case? Sentence: Abuse of discretion occurs \"when a material factor deserving significant weight is ignored, when an improper factor is relied upon, or when all proper and no improper factors are assessed, but the [district] court makes a serious mistake in weighing them.\", case: Ortiz v. Jordan.", "answer": "No"}
-{"qid": "170", "question": "Find a case which can support this sentence: Requiring that evidence be \u2018immediate' and \u2018apparent' constrains the expansion of the limited search authorized by the warrant into a generalized search, and it prevents officers from having an opportunity to create a reason to expand the search..", "answer": "United States v. McLevain"}
-{"qid": "171", "question": "Identify a case that can validate this sentence: Whether a search was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment is a question of law which is reviewed de novo..", "answer": "United States v. Pearce"}
-{"qid": "172", "question": "Can you provide a case that supports this statement: At the same time, \"it is well settled that the failure to state a proper cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for a dismissal for want of jurisdiction.\"?", "answer": "Bell v. Hood"}
-{"qid": "173", "question": "Can you provide a case that supports this statement: When a defendant presents an affidavit concerning a factual narrative of the events that is neither contradicted by the record nor inherently incredible and the government offers nothing more than contrary representations to contradict it, the defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing.?", "answer": "Huff v. United States"}
-{"qid": "174", "question": "Find a case which can support this sentence: Lemelson is not helped by his reference to our statement that it is \"not a material omission to fail to point out information of which the market is already aware.\".", "answer": "Thant v. Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc."}
-{"qid": "175", "question": "Provide an example of a case that would back up this sentence: The Supreme Court has \"explained that the phrase \u2018case of actual controversy' in the [DJA] refers to the [same] type of \u2018Cases' and \u2018Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III.\".", "answer": "MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc."}
-{"qid": "176", "question": "Can you provide a case that supports this statement: District courts must hold an evidentiary hearing on motions under \u00a7 2255 \"unless the record conclusively shows that the petitioner is entitled to no relief.\"?", "answer": "Martin v. United States"}
-{"qid": "177", "question": "Provide an example of a case that would back up this sentence: To succeed on summary judgment in reliance on an affirmative defense, the moving party must establish beyond peradventure all of the essential elements of the \"defense to warrant judgment in [its] favor.\".", "answer": "Smith v. Ochsner Health Sys."}
-{"qid": "178", "question": "Provide an example of a case that would back up this sentence: Once the case proceeds to trial, the full record developed in court supersedes the record existing at the time of the summary-judgment motion..", "answer": "Ortiz v. Jordan"}
-{"qid": "179", "question": "Find a case which can support this sentence: Proof of scienter requires \"a showing of either conscious intent to defraud or 'a high degree of recklessness.'\".", "answer": "SEC v. Ficken"}