text stringlengths 519 2.38k | label stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the <ei2160>decrease</ei2160> in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t40>11/01/89</t40> The company <ei2159>attributed</ei2159> the decrease in part to the exclusion of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key forei... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the <ei2160>decrease</ei2160> in part to the exclusion of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's <ei2162>status</ei2162> as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the decrease in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's <ei2162>status</ei2162> as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the decrease in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's <ei2162>status</ei2162> as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the decrease in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's <ei2162>status</ei2162> as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t40>11/01/89</t40> The company <ei2159>attributed</ei2159> the decrease in part to the exclusion of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key forei... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the decrease in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower <ei2163>sales</ei2163> in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the decrease in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower <ei2163>sales</ei2163> in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the <ei2160>decrease</ei2160> in part to the exclusion of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's <ei2162>status</ei2162> as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the <ei2160>decrease</ei2160> in part to the exclusion of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's <ei2162>status</ei2162> as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the <ei2160>decrease</ei2160> in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t40>11/01/89</t40> The company <ei2159>attributed</ei2159> the decrease in part to the exclusion of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key forei... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the <ei2160>decrease</ei2160> in part to the exclusion of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower <ei2163>sales</ei2163> in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the decrease in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's status as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower <ei2163>sales</ei2163> in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/01/89 The company attributed the decrease in part to the <ei2161>exclusion</ei2161> of the company's British sales from the current year's figures as a result of the subsidiary's <ei2162>status</ei2162> as a proposed discontinued operation and, in part, to lower sales in certain key... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> Nov. 6.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the start <ei123>offer</ei123> and the start <ei125>expire</ei125>... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to expire <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the start <ei123>offer</ei123> and the end <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Options... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The offer, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the start <ei125>expire</ei125> and the start <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Opti... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> Nov. 6.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the end <ei123>offer</ei123> and the end <ei125>expire</ei125>?
O... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to expire <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the end <ei123>offer</ei123> and the end <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Options:
... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The offer, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the end <ei125>expire</ei125> and the start <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Option... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to expire <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the start <ei123>offer</ei123> and the start <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Optio... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The offer, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the end <ei125>expire</ei125> and the end <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Options:... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> Nov. 6.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the end <ei123>offer</ei123> and the start <ei125>expire</ei125>?
... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The offer, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the start <ei125>expire</ei125> and the end <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Option... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to expire <t28>Nov. 6</t28>.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the end <ei123>offer</ei123> and the start <t28>Nov. 6</t28>?
Options... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 11/02/89 The <ei123>offer</ei123>, valued at about $576 million for the 33% of Telerate that Dow Jones does n't already own, had been set to <ei125>expire</ei125> Nov. 6.
Question:
What is the temporal relation between the start <ei123>offer</ei123> and the end <ei125>expire</ei125>?
... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the <ei2120>use</ei2120> of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times <ei2115>said</ei2115> in an editorial on <t74>Saturday, April 25</t74>: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it <ei2117>vindicated</ei2117> <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the <ei2120>use</ei2120> of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it <ei2117>vindicated</ei2117> <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it <ei2117>vindicated</ei2117> <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times <ei2115>said</ei2115> in an editorial on <t74>Saturday, April 25</t74>: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it <ei2117>vindicated</ei2117> <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the <ei2120>use</ei2120> of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times <ei2115>said</ei2115> in an editorial on <t74>Saturday, April 25</t74>: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its <ei2118>ruling</ei2118> <ei2119>invalidating</ei2119> the use of sexual stereotypes... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated <t76>two years ago</t76> in its ruling invalidating the <ei2120>use</ei2120> of sexual stereotypes to j... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times said in an editorial on Saturday, April 25: The Supreme Court <ei2116>took</ei2116> a detour <t75>this week</t75> from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The New York Times <ei2115>said</ei2115> in an editorial on <t74>Saturday, April 25</t74>: The Supreme Court took a detour this week from the core principle of gender fairness it vindicated two years ago in its ruling invalidating the use of sexual stereotypes to j... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
Wh... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
Wh... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and <ei2124>joined</ei2124> by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and <ei2124>joined</ei2124> by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and <ei2124>joined</ei2124> by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
Wh... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
Wh... | = |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were <ei2122>expressed</ei2122> in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was <ei2123>written</ei2123> by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The majority's views were expressed in three separate opinions, the most disquieting of which was written by a liberal member, Justice John Paul Stevens, and <ei2124>joined</ei2124> by a conservative, Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Question:
What is ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which <ei2126>found</ei2126> the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Que... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which <ei2126>found</ei2126> the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which <ei2126>found</ei2126> the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The opinion, which <ei2126>found</ei2126> the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Que... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Que... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: 04/24/1998 21:49:00 The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, <ei2128>relied</ei2128> heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Que... | > |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> The <ei2125>opinion</ei2125>, which found the gender distinction reasonable, relied heavily on outmoded generalities about family roles, including the flawed presumption that mothers have a closer relationship to their children than fathers do.
Question:... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> Butinstead of providing the votes to strike it down, they <ei2135>chose</ei2135> to uphold it on the flimsy ground that because the sex of the parent and not the child made the difference under the law, the plaintiff did not have standing to bring the ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> Butinstead of providing the votes to strike it down, they <ei2135>chose</ei2135> to uphold it on the flimsy ground that because the sex of the parent and not the child made the difference under the law, the plaintiff did not have standing to bring the ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> Butinstead of <ei2133>providing</ei2133> the votes to strike it down, they chose to uphold it on the flimsy ground that because the sex of the parent and not the child made the difference under the law, the plaintiff did not have standing to bring the ... | < |
Context:
Documents Creation Time: <t73>04/24/1998 21:49:00</t73> Butinstead of providing the votes to strike it down, they chose to uphold it on the flimsy ground that because the sex of the parent and not the child made the difference under the law, the plaintiff did not have <ei2137>standing</ei2137> to bring the ... | < |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.