Instruct: Given a premise, retrieve hypotheses that are entailed by the premise.
Query: So I'm inclined to accept this language, you know, not word for word, only to the extent where it states, rather generically, "wherein an affidavit is provided," I would take that sentence and simply say that affidavits have been provided, rather than "wherein." It's somewhat artificial or a little strained as it relates to this case.
The author doesn't like how the word "wherein" was used in what he's accepting.
Testimonies can always be from an affidavit.
It is rare that an affidavit is used in lieu of testimony.
The affidavit is from someone they know.
the parties does not accept the affidavit
affidavit was validated today
Some parties may reject the affidavit
it doesn't appear to be an ad hoc manner
Statements can be considered to be fair statements sometimes.
One reporter filed an affidavit.
It gets more convoluted than this, it's just that the context was cut down to a few sentences. 
I'm inclined to accept this language word for word.
GE sent out affidavits.
 And how I then distinguish this case from maybe my next case is, where a summons is provided and the Court or the parties don't accept the affidavit.
The affadavit was sent via email
The written statement shown is only one sentence.
The plaintiffs and defendants aren't in agreement regarding the affidavit
The affadavit is for an upcoming trial
You wonder if there may not be a chance to accept the (statement sworn in court to be true) instead of the statements (in court).

The court does not accept the affidavit
The Modern Language Associate style requires the use of names in order to convey where information came from. 
Spoken accounts are written down too.
So I'm inclined to accept this stale language
So I'm inclined to accept this salty language
So I'm inclined to accept this weird language