Answer:
b. lacked personal jurisdiction
Explanation:
A court is said to lack personal jurisdiction when the offense or activity doesn’t take place in the location of the court or when the court isn’t situated in the state of origin of the defendant.
Ada filing the case against Chang at a court in Ohio which isn’t Chang’s state of origin and in which he has not visited before means that the court at Ohio lacks personal jurisdiction to progress with the case.
According to John F. Galliher, legal definitions of criminality are arrived at through a __________ process.
Answer: guilty vedect
Which legal school of thought is illustrated in this dialogue? DONUT DAY AT THE OFFICE Part 7 Alison: (She stands during David's speech as if inspired but sits down once Bob starts talking.) Bob: Right. Power to the people David. Anyone else hungry? (He tries to slowly move to the donuts and Joyce continues to defend them like a point guard.) Lee: I have an idea that might address all of these issues. What if none of us have any of these donuts but instead we break up into teams and sell them to our coworkers for a profit? Instead of getting one or two donuts, we can stop on our way home and pick up a dozen of them each with our profits. In this case, we ignore the company stick-in-the-mud book regulations because, as you can see, we are obviously presented with some opportunities for a little economic development. Corporate rules here must bow to economic opportunity. If we let our rules block our prosperity, what kind of company will we become? End Part 7 Command school of thought. Law and economics school of thought. Sociological school of thought. Legal realism school of thought.
Answer:
The legal school of thought illustrated in this dialogue is:
Law and economics school of thought.
Explanation:
The law and economics school of thought postulates that economic analyses, theories, and methods should be brought to the practice and interpretation of laws. This means that the tools of economic reasoning are the best tools for justified and consistent legal practices. This school of thought is significantly one of the dominant theories of jurisprudence.
A person may legally ride in the back of a pickup truck when: The sides of the pickup bed are at least 24 inches high. The back of the pickup is covered with a camper shell. In a secured seat and while using an approved safety belt.
Answer:
C. In a secured seat and while using an approved safety belt.
Explanation:
Pick up trucks are manufactured for the purpose of transporting goods or other equipment but not for the transportation of humans. While riding at the back of a pickup truck can seem enticing, if appropriate measures are not considered, then there would likely be an accident for the driver might take a sharp turn which could cause the passengers behind harm.
One of the laws for riding in the back of a pickup truck is possessing a federally-approved restraint system which protects the rider in the bed of the truck. So, the rider should seat in a secured seat with an approved safety seat belt to keep him protected in the event of a crash.
Legally speaking, a person can only ride in the back of a pickup truck when In a secured seat and while using an approved safety belt.
When can a person ride in a pickup?The back of a pickup truck is open and can lead to someone falling off if they aren't careful.
For this reason, the law demands that the back should have a secured seat which has a seatbelt that is approved by the relevant authority. If this isn't the case then no one should sit in the back.
Find out more on driving regulations at https://brainly.com/question/11291892.
Bentham and Kant agree on?
Answer:
Morality constrains individual self-interest
Explanation:
both authors believe that morality puts limits on what any given individual may do in the pursuit of his or self-interest. For example: Kant argues that one should never make a lying promise, even if is one's interest to do so; Bentham argues that one shoukd maximise everyone's aggregate pleasure minus pain, not only one's own.
2. Why do you think mandatory minimum punishment sentencing dont have the deterrent
effect that they were created to prove?
Answer:
Minimum sentencing does not have the deterrent effect it was created to have because, it is punishing individuals on a set scale and not on the circumstances of the case.
Explanation:
Select the correct answer. Assume that you are a member of a special interest group that wants to raise taxes on certain items. Who would you present your idea to if you wanted it to be proposed as a bill? A. a Supreme Court justice B. the president C. the American people D. a senator E. a member of the House
Answer:
the house of representatives or E a member of the house
Explanation:
in Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution provides that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives but that the Senate may propose, or concur with, amendments. By tradition, general appropriation bills also originate in the House of Representatives.
All bills to raise money must come from the House of Representatives, according to Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution, though changes may be proposed or approved by the Senate. General appropriation legislation typically start in the House of Representatives as well. Hence option E is correct .
Who are a member of the House ?The lower house of the United States Congress is the House of Representatives, sometimes known as the House of Representatives, the U.S. House, or just the House. The Senate is the upper chamber. They make up the United States' bicameral national legislature as a whole.
The United States Constitution's Article One established the makeup of the House. According to the Uniform Congressional District Act, the House is made up of representatives who sit in single-member congressional district based on population as determined by the United States Census, with one representative allotted to each district, provided that each state is entitled to at least one.
All representatives have been chosen directly from the government's foundation in 1789, although universal suffrage did not become a reality until after the Civil Rights Movement and the 19th Amendment's ratification.
Learn more about USA here
https://brainly.com/question/555251
# SPJ 2
It would be inappropriate to refer to "criminal law," as if it were a singular entity. Why is this? Discuss all that "criminal law" really includes in the U.S.
Answer:
In simple words, Crime legislation is an offence-related area of law. It forbids behaviour that is viewed as dangerous, hazardous and sometimes jeopardising the land, health , safety and spiritual well-being of others, including one's own self.
Criminal law differs significantly by territory and varies from common law, within which there is more focus on resolving disputes and market financing than on retribution or reintegration.
Criminal process is a formalised legal action that verifies the conduct of a felony and requires the perpetrator to be convicted or rehabilitated.
Which of the following is a benefit of restoration justice, which the judge might have felt was valuable in Justin case?
Answer:
In simple words, Restorative justice refers to the legal strategy where one of the approaches to a case is to arrange a meeting between both the perpetrator including the complainant, often with members of the broader community.
Academic evaluation of restorative justice seems to be optimistic. Most findings indicate that it makes criminals less inclined to commit an offence. The 2007 research also indicates that it would have the greatest level of similar values and responsibility for any sort of justice.
Casey Martin was a golfer on the PGA Tour who, due to an illness, needed a golf cart to move around the course. After being denied permission to use a cart, Martin sued the PGA. Many of the players on the tour objected to the suggestion that Martin should be allowed to use a cart. Which of the following objections to Martin’s being allowed to use the cart is an expression of teleological reasoning?a) “Walking the course is part of the game. If you allow Martin to ride a cart, he really isn’t playing the game anymore.” b) “If Martin does not have to walk the course, he will have an unfair advantage.” c) “The PGA is a private organization. The courts should not tell a private organization what to do.” d) (a) and (b). e) (a), (b), and (c).
Answer:
d) (a) and (b).
Explanation:
Teleology is any philosophical account of the purpose of a thing
Teological reasoning has to do with finding a reason to explain the phenomena in relation to purpose they serve instead of their causes.
From the scenario given, Martin was refused permission to use a cart to play golf due to an illness and the objections to Martin's use of the cart are a0 a) “Walking the course is part of the game. If you allow Martin to ride a cart, he really isn’t playing the game anymore.” b) “If Martin does not have to walk the course, he will have an unfair advantage.”
Answer: A
Explanation:
According to John F. Galliher, legal definitions of criminality are arrived at through a __________ process.
Define, describe, compare, and contrast common-law crimes and statutory crimes. Be sure to provide examples.
Answer:
Common law is commonly defined as jurisprudence and it is of 2 types – one in which the decisions made are existing legislation in which there are no legislation and another where the court may require the current law and establish new definitions and divisions.
The legislative regulations can be enacted by the various departments of a country. Therefore, there's many laws enacted by state and federal governments, laws enacted by cities and municipalities, all of which have the force of law.
2. Relatively few drivers are touched by the
traffic crash problem, either directly or
indirectly. TRUE OR FALSE
Answer:
F
Explanation:
Section 35-4-20 of the Michie's Alabama Code, published by LexisNexis in 1991.
Answer:
thats just crazy
Explanation:
Which of the following is an example of an interest group?
O A. The Democratic Party
B. The Senate
O C. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
O D. The United Nations
Which government body authorized CTSOs? Through the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act, the has authorized CTSOs.
CTSO's also called as Carl D Perkins Vocational and Technical Educational Act was authorized by Federal Government i.e. The Congress in 1984.
What is CTSO?CTSO is a principal source of federal funding to states and discretionary grants for the improvement of secondary and post secondary career and technical education program across the nation.
The purpose of the act is to develop fully the academic, career and technical skills of secondary and post secondary students who elect to enroll in career and technical education program.
The act also aims to increase the quality of technical education within the United States in order to help the economy.
History:
The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 was the first authorization for the federal funding of vocational education. Subsequent legislation for vocational education included the Vocational Act of 1973 and the Carl D Perkins Act of 1984.
Later different forms of act like Perkins II in 1990, Perkins III in 1998 and Perkins IV in 2006 were introduced.
In 2018 President Trump signed into law for the re authorization of the Act in 2018 under the name of Perkins V passed unanimously by the Congress.
The Perkins IV included three major areas of revision:
- Use of career and technical education instead of vocational education
- Maintaining the Tech Prep program as a separate federal funding stream within the legislation
- Maintaining state administrative funding at 5% of a state's allocation.
What is Federal Government?Federalism is a mixed or compound mode of government that combines a general government with regional governments in a single political system, dividing the powers between the two.
The political principles that animate federal systems emphasize the primacy of bargaining and negotiated coordination among several power centers. They stress the virtues of dispersed power centers as a means for safeguarding individual and local liberties
To learn more about CTSO here
https://brainly.com/question/8903174
#SPJ3
Joe buys some watermelon seeds from a seed manufacturer's catalog. The catalog describes the seed Joe buys as "top quality." Joe strongly relies upon this statement in making the purchase. The seed turns out to be worthless, and Joe sues the manufacturer for breach of express warranty. You are the attorney representing the manufacturer. Which of the following is your best argument for escaping liability?
A. That a catalog statement cannot create an express warranty.
B. That the basis-of-the-bargain requirement was not met.
C. That the alleged warranty was merely sales talk.
E. That the manufacturer did not give a sample or a model of the seeds.
Answer:
Correct Answer:
E. That the manufacturer did not give a sample or a model of the seeds.
Explanation:
As an attorney of the manufacturer, the best argument in the case between my client and the seed buyer, Joe would be on the fact that, the manufacturer did not give a sample or model of the seeds to Joe to verify if it meets his requirements.
Also, Joe never requested to see sample of the seeds as was standard with buying of agricultural products.
The role of the United States Marshals was based on the role of _____. A. the town crier B. early colonial watches C. the sheriff D. police officers
Answer:
C the sheriff
Explanation:
which of the following is something that both Bentham abd Mill would endorse
Answer:
The good is best understood in terms of pleasure.
Explanation:
Answer:The good is best understood in terms of pleasure.
Explanation:
which article is related to Equality before law
Answer:
Article 14 guarantees to all persons equality before the law and equal protection of the laws.
Answer:
article 14
Explanation:
When the Constitution entitles all citizens to “due process” of law, what does this phrase mean?
It is C) Every citizen has the right to a trial
Answer:
D: all of the above
Explanation:
Who was the first Postmaster General?
A. George Washington
B. George Washington
C. Benjamin Franklin
D. Washington Carver
It is C. Benjamin Franklin
Answer:
hi, you're answer would be
C. Benjamin Franklin
Hope it's help :)
Answer:
the guy on the $100 bill
Explanation:
If you drive under the influence, you
A. Increase the risk of killing yourself or another person.
B. Will have to pay double the fine if you’re ticketed for speeding.
C. Are less likely to be injured in a collision.
D. I’m not committing a crime unless your BAL is .08 or higher
Answer:
the answer is a.
Explanation:
cuz you still arent 100 pecent paying attwntion
Answer:
A. Increase the risk of killing yourself or another person
Explanation:
While under the influence, you're not fully conscious or aware of your surroundings. That being said, driving is a task that acquires the driver to be conscious and to have awareness for their safety and the other driver's safety. If the driver is intoxicated, they risk a collision and killing people if the collison is deadly.
One reason for the failure of SA
Answer:
visa regulations on impact SAA
Abel was employed as a security guard for Seep Corporation. Abel's job was to guard a fenced-in area and to use force to keep intruders from climbing the fence to enter the plant. His working hours were from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. At about 11:00 P.M. one evening, Abel drove past his place of employment. He saw a teenager named Johnny climbing the outside of the fence that he guarded during the day. Angered by this violation of Seep's property rights and by the fact that Johnny had called him a "potbellied moron" only three days earlier, Abel stopped his car, ran up to the fence, pulled Johnny off of it, and beat him up. Johnny sues Seep Corporation for Abel's assault and battery (both intentional torts). Which of the following is most likely to be the court's verdict? Group of answer choices
Answer:
B. Seep's is not liable because Abel didn't act within the scope of his employment.
Explanation:
According to the facts, Abel is a rightful employee of Seep Corporation. And he also has a duty to preserve the interest of his employer.
But at the same time, his act of beating up and assaulting Johnny was done outside of the jurisdiction of his working hours. And as such, he wasn't covered in the company's rule of using "force to keep intruders from climbing the fence to enter the plant". Moreover, the personal attack that Johnny had done on him makes this assault personal. So, Abel's attack on Johnny has nothing to do with the company he works for, and the Corporation is not liable for any charges or damages that their employee had done outside of his 'employment' hours.
Thus, the correct answer is option B.
100 POINTS!!!!!!!! At close firing distances, gasses from a gun's muzzle can produce a star-shaped pattern around a bullet hole. true false
Answer:
True
Explanation:
The star comes from the gasses and heat so it has to be close to the bullet hole.
My question was True or Flase it has to be 3 feet away and I chose false and got it right.
The statement is "The star comes from the gasses and heat, so it has to be close to the bullet hole" is true.
What is a gun's muzzle?A gun muzzle is an essential component of firearms such as small firearms, artillery pieces, and air guns. It is the straight firing tube, generally composed of rigid high-strength metal, through which a confined fast expansion of high-pressure gas is employed to drive a projectile at high velocity out of the front end.
Muzzle gases can also create a star-shaped pattern around the bullet hole. As the distance increases, a gun shot 12 to 18 inches from the target can frequently create a halo of smoke around the bullet hole. The target may still display gunpowder residue at 25 inches. Therefore, it can be concluded that the above statement is true.
Learn more about gun muzzle here:
https://brainly.com/question/30167057
#SPJ2
What is your opinion regarding marriage due to financial interest, power, status or social prestige? ”. Do you think that marriages / relationships of this type still occur? help pleaseeeee
Answer:
In my opinion, I do not like the fact tht people just marry because of money or power. People still do this to this day and I do not think that it is okay. You should marry someone because you love them, not because you want power or more money.
Hope this helps! （づ￣3￣）づ╭❤～
Explanation:
Answer:Love is more important than money in my opinion.
Explanation:
Examine some of the difficulties in the financial system in Ghana and how it has been addressed?
Answer:
The several banks in Ghana had collapsed. The banks were given license few years ago. The banks were heavily deficient in liquidity and they had instability in financial systems.
Explanation:
There have been mergers of some banks in Ghana which lead to financial system inconsistencies. There was continuous mobilization of fund which resulted in unstable deposits. The challenges have been addressed by Implementing Institution Act of 2016.
The fact that statutes requiring a license only requires payment of a fee indicates that the purpose of the law is to:
Answer:
"Raise money" is the right answer.
Explanation:
Trying to raise a certain amount of income to support somebody or something, whether through employment as well as a charitable organization. After that, because there's no requirement specification provision and therefore only referenced funds (to expect to be paid fee) for obtaining a license.So that the above is the correct choice.
Which of the following statements is true about CERTs? A. CERTs are restricted to disaster response activities in their neighborhood. B. CERTS often support emergency response agencies with nonemergency projects in the community. C. Being a CERT volunteer requires little time because disasters do not occur frequently. D. CERTS never support emergency response agencies with nonemergency projects.
Answer:
A. CERTs are restricted to disaster response activities in their neighborhood.
Explanation:
CERT is an educational program that seeks to instruct volunteers who can help their communities in emergencies or disasters, in addition to teaching concepts for preventing these disasters, low-complexity rescues and even simpler medical procedures that can make all the difference in safety of the victims .. As stated before, the goal is for the volunteer to be able to help their community in the face of a need.
Why the criminal justice system continues to fail taxepayers?
The criminal justice system in the United States serves the purpose of upholding the rule of law and ensuring the safety of citizens. It works under the notion that the country operates under certain rules, and that breaking those rules results in a punishment. However, the system is flawed and there are several reasons why it continues to fail the taxpayers who fund it.
One problem of the criminal justice system is that it relies on processes that are flawed by their very nature, such as human memories, fingerprints, DNA evidence and eyewitnesses. This can result in wrong convictions of innocent people.
Another problem of the system is that many people who work in it possess biases. Judges, lawyers, and the police can be biased towards certain races, gender, age groups or other groups of people. This makes it difficult for justice to be administered fairly to all people.
Finally, another problem of the criminal justice system is that over time, sentences have become longer, more serious, and more common. However, these sentences do not always deter crime, and often get in the way of the rehabilitation of past convicts. This defeats the purpose of the system and makes it difficult to ensure the safety of the population.
