Answer:
Explanation:
Moore v. Harper, a North Carolina congressional gerrymandering case. North Carolina’s legislative leaders are appealing a ruling from the North Carolina Supreme Court striking down the state’s congressional map as an extreme partisan gerrymander. The theory advanced by the legislators, if accepted, would radically reshape the workings of American government, which is why the ACLU, the ACLU of North Carolina, and our legal partners filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court.
who wrote: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” ?
when does carnegie mellon release regular decisions
Carnegie Mellon University typically releases regular decision admissions results in late March or early April. The specific date varies each year, so it's important to check the university's website or admissions portal for the most up-to-date information.
Once decisions are released, applicants can log in to their account to view their admission status. Regular decision applicants generally have a deadline of January 4th to submit their completed application, including all required documents and supplemental materials. The university then reviews all applications and makes decisions based on factors such as academic performance, test scores, extracurricular involvement, and personal essays.
It's important to note that Carnegie Mellon has a highly competitive admissions process, with a low acceptance rate. Therefore, it's crucial to put your best effort into your application to increase your chances of being admitted. If you're waitlisted or not admitted, consider other options and stay positive about your college future.
In summary, Carnegie Mellon releases regular decision results in late March or early April, and applicants can access their admission status through their online account. Be sure to keep an eye on the university's website for the most current information regarding decision release dates.
To learn more about Carnegie Mellon University here:
https://brainly.com/question/29577418#
#SPJ11
which rationale looks at how close defendants came to completing their crimes?
The rationale that looks at how close defendants came to completing their crimes is called "attempt" in criminal law.
An attempt is a crime in which a person intends to commit a crime and takes a significant step toward completing it but fails to complete it. The rationale behind attempting the crime is based on how close defendants came to completing their crimes.
An attempt is defined as an offense in which the defendant attempts to commit a crime and takes substantial steps toward completing it but fails to complete it. Attempted crimes are punishable under criminal law with a sentence of imprisonment or other penalties such as fines or probation.
An attempt is determined by analyzing the defendant's conduct in the case. A person cannot be guilty of an attempted crime if he or she has not committed a crime or has not made any significant attempt to commit the crime.
You can learn more about criminal law at: https://brainly.com/question/32272183
#SPJ11
What type of defense is insanity
Answer:
What type of defense is insanity?
The insanity defense refers to a defense that a defendant can plead in a criminal trial. In an insanity defense, the defendant admits the action but asserts a lack of culpability based on mental illness. The insanity defense is classified as an excuse defense, rather than a justification defense.
Explanation:
ur welcome
In treating gay and lesbian couples and families, it is important to be aware of:
A) internal and external issues
B) extended family involvement
C) local, state, and national laws
D) all of the above
In treating gay and lesbian couples and families, it is important to be aware of:
internal and external issuesextended family involvementlocal, state, and national lawsThus, option D is the correct option.
In treating gay and lesbian couples and families, it is important to be aware of internal and external issues that they may face, such as societal attitudes and discrimination. Extended family involvement can also play a significant role in their lives and should be considered.
Additionally, understanding and adhering to local, state, and national laws regarding the rights and protections of gay and lesbian individuals and families is essential for providing appropriate and inclusive care. Therefore, all of the options (A, B, and C) are important considerations when treating gay and lesbian couples and families.
Learn more about gay and lesbian couples here:
https://brainly.com/question/31753309
#SPJ4
Which of the following is illegal?
(A) = Saying "hi" to someone politely.
(B) = Cooking Mash potatoes and accidentally made it ugly.
(C) = Swinging a bat around in public for no reason.
(D) = Making fun of the clouds.
(E) = Carrying a Firearm with a License for it.
(F) = Killing someone for self-defense purposes.
(G) = Saying the Word "Voldemort" in public.
(There is only one answer that is illegal and could get your bat taken away and fine, and maybe incarceration (Arrest), and this is an example called disorderly conduct.)
Answer:
c?
Explanation:
i'm guessing it is c because that is the most reasonable and well one that seems like it might be because you can either hurt someone or attempt murder or something. the other answers are just random and are all legal now that i come to think of it, which is weird.
do you think that locard’s hypothesis is generally accurate
Yes, I do think that Locard’s hypothesis is generally accurate. This hypothesis has been the basis for criminal investigation for many years.
Locard's hypothesis, also known as Locard's Exchange Principle, states that "every contact leaves a trace." In other words, whenever two objects come into contact with each other, there will be an exchange of materials between them.
This principle is widely accepted in the field of forensic science and is used to link suspects to crime scenes and victims.
While there may be cases where the exchange of materials is not detectable, Locard's hypothesis is still considered to be generally accurate.
This is because the principle is based on the fact that it is nearly impossible for two objects to come into contact without leaving some sort of trace evidence. Whether it is a fingerprint, DNA, or fibers, there is almost always some sort of evidence left behind.
Overall, Locard's hypothesis is a valuable tool in forensic investigations and is generally considered to be accurate.
Another question about hypothesis in https://brainly.com/question/606806
#SPJ11
Burt terminated his exclusive right-to-sell listing agreement with Scott, his listing broker, without cause. Burt may legally do this as long as he's ______.
A. Unhappy with Scott's servicesB. Willing to find his own buyerC. A real estate licenseeD. Willing to pay Scott's commission anyway
Burt may legally terminate his exclusive right-to-sell listing agreement with Scott, his listing broker, without cause as long as he is willing to find his own buyer. (B)
This is because in an exclusive right-to-sell listing agreement, the seller agrees to pay the broker's commission regardless of who finds the buyer.
Therefore, regardless of whether Burt or the broker finds the buyer, Burt is still responsible for the commission. Option A is incorrect because it is not required that Burt be unhappy with Scott's services to terminate the listing agreement.
Option C is incorrect because it is not necessary for Burt to be a real estate licensee to terminate the listing agreement. Option D is incorrect because Burt does not need to be willing to pay Scott's commission for him to terminate the listing agreement.
To know more about listing agreement click on below link:
https://brainly.com/question/28918177#
#SPJ11
A woman looking at cosmetics in a drug store was noticed by the store
manager because she was not carrying a purse. She was pushing a
shopping cart and put several cosmetic items into the cart. She went to
the checkout stand and paid for all the items but one lipstick, which
remained in the shopping cart. The manager noticed the lipstick in the
cart and followed the female to her car. As the manager approached the
female, she was picking the lipstick up from the cart. When the manager
told her he was arresting her for shoplifting, she said that she did not see
the lipstick in the cart until she got to her car and picked it up to return it
to the store. The lipstick cost $5.99, and the female had $1.09 on her
person. Answer the following questions:
1. Was there any responsibility on the part of the clerk or manager to ensure that
all items were paid for because she left the store? Why, or why not? As to part of
the representative or supervisor, indeed, without a doubt, there exists an obligation. For the
explanation that chiefs ought to be
2. Should she be arrested? If so, on what charges, and why? If not, why not?
Write a statement reflecting your decision as though you were filling out a
police report.
3.
a statute enacted by congress that authorizes the creation of an administrative agency and specifies the name, composition, purpose, and powers of the agency is known as
A statute enacted by Congress that authorizes the creation of an administrative agency and provides details such as the agency's name, composition, purpose, and powers is commonly referred to as an enabling statute or an enabling act.
The statute is known as an enabling act or an enabling legislation. It provides the legal authority for the creation and operation of administrative agencies and outlines their responsibilities, structure, and powers. It serves as the legal foundation for the existence and operation of the agency, granting it the authority and direction necessary to carry out its designated functions. The enabling act serves as the foundation for the agency's existence and guides its decision-making processes.
In conclusion, an enabling statute is a legislative enactment that establishes an administrative agency and outlines its essential characteristics, including its name, composition, purpose, and powers.
To know more about administrative agency refer here :
https://brainly.com/question/31064555
#SPJ11
a. is a more convenient location to hold the trial. b. has jurisdiction. c. has a sufficient stake in the matter. d. has sufficient minimum contacts with the parties.
The answer is d. has sufficient minimum contacts with the parties.
When determining which court has jurisdiction over a case, one of the factors to consider is whether the court has sufficient minimum contacts with the parties involved. This concept is derived from the principle of due process, which ensures that a court's exercise of jurisdiction is fair and reasonable. The minimum contacts requirement means that the court must have some connection or relationship with the parties or the subject matter of the case to assert jurisdiction.
For a court to have sufficient minimum contacts, it generally means that the parties or the actions giving rise to the case have some connection to the geographic jurisdiction of that court. This connection could be based on factors such as where the parties reside, where the events giving rise to the case occurred, or where the alleged harm or injury took place. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that the court has a reasonable basis to assert authority over the case and that it is not imposing its jurisdiction arbitrarily or unfairly.
By having sufficient minimum contacts, the court can establish a legitimate connection to the case and the parties involved, ensuring that it is the appropriate venue for hearing and resolving the matter at hand.
Learn more about contacts
#SPJ11
brainly.com/question/30650176
When analyzing a strand of hair, investigators would first try to collect DNA from which general location?
Answer:
from the hair follicle
what is the texas constitutional amendment special election
How many constitutional amendments are there in Texas?
As of 2019 (the 86th Legislature), the Texas Legislature has proposed a total of 690 amendments. Of these, 507 have been adopted, and 180 have been defeated by Texas voters. Thus, the Texas Constitution has been amended 507 times since its adoption in 1876.
what part of the constitution includes the equal protection clause and was used to decide the case brown v. board of education?
The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution contains the Equal Protection Clause, which was used in the decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This clause provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. This clause was central to the landmark Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which declared racial segregation in public schools to be unconstitutional. The Court held that separate educational facilities were inherently unequal and violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision paved the way for the desegregation of public schools and became a catalyst for the broader civil rights movement in the United States.
learn more about Constitution here:
https://brainly.com/question/29799909
#SPJ4
PLEASE HURRY
Why did the Anti-Federalists urge the addition of a bill of rights to the Constitution?
O to check the power of state governments
to lower the costs of government
O to protect individual liberties
O to abolish slavery
Answer:
To protect individual liberties
Explanation:
How was Ken Kendrick of The Peanut Corporation of America a typical whistleblower? An atypical whistleblower?
2. Explain what happened in the 1968 Supreme Court's re-interpretation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution regarding public employees' limited speech protections
3. Describe at least two other times since the Pickering decision in which the Supreme Court revisited the ruling. What were the outcomes?
4. According to the Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act, what are the three elements of a wrongful discharge?
Ken Kendrick,was a typical whistleblower .
-The Court held that a public employee's speech is protected by the First Amendment if it addresses a matter of public concern .
-Since the Pickering decision, the Court clarified that the Pickering balancing test must take into account the context, form, and content of the speech at issue.
-The Montana Wrongful Discharge specifies that the discharge must not violate public policy.
1. Ken Kendrick, an employee of The Peanut Corporation of America (PCA), was a typical whistleblower because he informed his management about the unsanitary practices of the company, which were a potential risk to public health, and when he found that the management was not doing anything to remedy the situation, he reported the matter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). An atypical whistleblower because he came forward after it was already too late, and the company had already shipped out contaminated products that were responsible for an outbreak of Salmonella that sickened hundreds of people across the United States.
2. In 1968, the U.S. Supreme Court reinterpreted the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution regarding public employees' limited speech protections in the case of Pickering v. Board of Education. The Court held that a public employee's speech is protected by the First Amendment if it addresses a matter of public concern and the employee's interest in expressing his or her opinion outweighs the government's interest in promoting efficiency.
3. Since the Pickering decision, the Supreme Court has revisited the ruling at least two other times. The first was in Connick v. Myers (1983), where the Court clarified that the Pickering balancing test must take into account the context, form, and content of the speech at issue. The second was in Garcetti v. Ceballos (2006), where the Court held that speech made by a public employee as part of his or her official duties is not protected by the First Amendment.
4. The Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act specifies three elements of a wrongful discharge. The first is that the discharge must not violate public policy, as expressed in the Montana Constitution, statutes, or administrative regulations. The second is that the employee must have been performing a job duty that is considered important to the public interest or safety. The third is that the employee must have exhausted all available grievance or administrative remedies before filing a wrongful discharge claim.
For more such questions on Amendment visit:
https://brainly.com/question/687600
#SPJ8
if legislators want to create a law that will pass strict scrutiny, they must be certain that the law does which of the following?
If legislators want to create a law that will pass strict scrutiny, they must be certain that the law: a. Be justified by a compelling government interest.
What is a law?A law can be defined as the system of rules, principles, standards, and regulations, that are enacted (established) by legislators, adopted and enforced in a community, state, or society by the executive arm of government, in order to regulate all of the actions, behavior, conduct, and testimonies of all individuals.
What is the legislative branch?Legislative branch can be defined as one of the three branch (arm) of government that comprises legislators who are saddled with the responsibility of creating and enacting laws in a particular country.
In conclusion, a law that is justified by a compelling government interest would most likely pass strict scrutiny and be adopted as a statute and enshrined in the constitution.
Read more on law here: brainly.com/question/22967374
#SPJ1
Complete Question:
If legislators want to create a law that will pass strict scrutiny, they must be certain that the law does which of the following?
a. Be justified by a compelling government interest
b. Be broadly tailored to meet multiple government interests
c. Be rationally related to a government interest
d. Be the most restrictive means to accomplish the goal
e. Be supported by a large majority of citizens
At a t-intersection, which driver has the right-of-way?
2. A, being a business minded person
decided to put a business (KTV Bar)
beside San Sebastian College, Manila.
As part of
of its promotion, live
entertainment is being offered. Most of
its patrons are students. The operation of
the business starts from 1pm and ends
at 4am. Can the municipal mayor order
the foreclosure
of
business
Yes, the municipal mayor can order the foreclosure of A's business if it is found to be violating any laws or ordinances.
Why can the municipal mayor order the foreclosure ?In the present scenario, the commercial entity is sited in close proximity to an educational institution and facilitates live amusement services. This has the potential to cause disturbance to the students and the vicinal populace.
Moreover, the enterprise conducts its operations from 1:00 PM until 4:00 AM, thus deviating from standard business hours. This phenomenon has the potential to result in the emission of sound waves perceived as excessive by individuals, commonly referred to as noise pollution, as well as other disruptions.
The municipal mayor possesses the authority to implement and uphold legal regulations while safeguarding the welfare of the general public. In the event that a violation of laws or ordinances by A's business is discovered, the individual in question possesses the power to mandate the closure of said business.
Find out more on foreclosure at https://brainly.com/question/13055547
#SPJ1
The Tricameral system 1980s
The following question refers to the topic of conservatism in the nineteenth century.
Which of the following best explains why Russia emerged as the leading supporter of the conservative political order established in 1815 ?
A. Russian society had been less influenced by Enlightenment thought than were other European states.
B. The Russian monarchy had undertaken a program of modernization and Westernization under Tsar Peter the Great and his successors.
C. Russia had formed part of the coalition that defeated Napoleon.
D. Russia was the largest European state in terms of land area and population.
Answer:
A. Russian society had been less influenced by Enlightenment thought than were other European states.
Explanation:
During the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Enlightenment ideas and principles of liberalism, democracy, and nationalism had gained widespread support and led to significant political and social changes across Europe. However, Russia was less affected by these ideas and changes, in part due to its distance from the epicenter of the Enlightenment movement, its relative isolation from Western Europe, and the influence of the conservative Russian Orthodox Church. Additionally, the Russian monarchy had long maintained an autocratic system of government that emphasized the power of the ruler and the stability of the state over individual rights and freedoms.
Furthermore, while Russia did participate in the coalition that defeated Napoleon, it was not the only European state to do so. Therefore, this alone cannot explain why Russia emerged as the leading supporter of the conservative political order established in 1815.
In contrast, options B and D provide plausible explanations for why Russia emerged as a leading supporter of conservatism in the 19th century. Under Tsar Peter the Great and his successors, Russia had indeed undertaken a program of modernization and Westernization. However, this modernization was selective and geared towards enhancing the power of the state rather than promoting liberal values. Additionally, as the largest European state in terms of land area and population, Russia had significant geopolitical influence and was able to use its resources and military power to maintain the conservative political order established in 1815.
Even if a declarant gives a statement to police concerning an alleged crime, that statement could still qualify as non-testimonial if police question the declarant while responding to an _________ ____________ (two words). The Supreme Court demarcated this boundary for testimonial hearsay in Davis v. Washington, 126 S. Ct. 2266 (2006), where the primary purpose of the questioning was not to collect evidence of a past crime, but to secure the scene and protect the declarant.
Courts applying the Davis exception most often summarize it with phrases such as "ongoing emergency" or "emergency situation." When police are responding to an ongoing emergency, their motive is to ensure the safety of all concerned, not to collect evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in Davis that statements elicited by police while responding to an ongoing emergency are not testimonial for purposes of the Confronta
Courts applying the Davis exception most often summarize it with phrases such as "ongoing emergency" or "emergency situation." When police are responding to an ongoing emergency, their motive is to ensure the safety of all concerned, not to collect evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in Davis that statements elicited by police while responding to an ongoing emergency are not testimonial for purposes of the Confrontation Clause.
Testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-ITlooks like the kind of testimony that would be offered at trial in aid of prosecution;
-It is made when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no ongoing emergency; and
-The primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to a later criminal prosecution.
The Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution protects the right of a criminal defendant to be confronted by his or her accusers in Court and to cross-examine any testimony that they may offer. The admission of hearsay (an out-of-court statement) – even if admissible under an exception to the rule against hearsay – can be in direct conflict with the right of Confrontation.
On the other hand, “non-testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-It is made primarily for the purpose of assisting police to meet an ongoing emergency; or
-It was made primarily for a purpose other than discovering, establishing or proving past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.
To learn more about Testimony visit here ; https://brainly.com/question/29244222?referrer=searchResultssearchResults
#SPJ4
Opponents of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in an attempt to prevent its passing, inserted a prohibition against______discrimination in employment, thinking that such discrimination was acceptable and that many others agreed with them.
Which situation best illustrates the political process of gerrymandering?
O A. A state government creates a new district after it receives an
additional seat in Congress following the census.
O B. A state legislature redraws electoral districts to ensure that
African Americans do not form a majority in any district.
O C. Congress passes a new law strictly limiting state governments'
ability to change their congressional district borders.
OD. A governor issues an order prohibiting politicians from raising
funds outside of their home districts.
Answer:
D. A governor issues an order prohibiting politicians from raising funds outside of their home districts
Explanation:
Sana makatulong
congress' ability to pass laws needed to carry out its expressed powers is known as the __________ clause.
Congress' ability to pass laws needed to carry out its expressed powers is known as the "necessary and proper" clause.
The necessary and proper clause is found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the United States Constitution, which grants Congress the authority to make all laws that are necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers specifically enumerated to it.
The exact wording of the clause states that Congress has the power "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
The purpose of the necessary and proper clause is to provide Congress with the flexibility and authority to pass legislation beyond its expressly listed powers, as long as it is necessary and proper for the functioning and execution of those powers.
It serves as a constitutional basis for implied powers, allowing Congress to legislate on matters that may not be explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but are closely related to its enumerated powers.
The necessary and proper clause has been interpreted broadly by the courts, expanding Congress' authority to pass laws that enable the effective exercise of its express powers.
For such more question on laws:
https://brainly.com/question/30037866
#SPJ8
Which of the following would most likely be considered a violation of the Fourth Amendment?
OA.
Confiscating the cellphone of a student who made a bomb threat
OB.
Searching the lockers of all students with black hair
O c. Stopping a vehicle believed to be involved in a bank robbery
OD
Stopping and searching all cars at the US-Mexico border
Answer:
OB
Explanation:
There is no reason to confiscate them but people in all other options could be doing something, have done, or they are currently doing it. Everything but OB is reasonable.
A buyer entered into a written contract with a seller to purchase his commercial property for $100,000. The contract did not specify the quality of title to be conveyed, and made no mention of easements or reservations. The closing was set for November 25, three months from the signing of the contract. Shortly thereafter, the buyer obtained a survey of the property, which revealed that the city had an easement for the public sidewalk that ran in front of the store. Because this actually enhanced the value of the property, the buyer did not mention it to the seller. Subsequently, the buyer found a better location for her business. On November 1, the buyer notified the seller that she no longer intended to purchase the property. The seller told her that he intended to hold her to her contract. At closing, the buyer refused to tender the purchase price, claiming that the seller's title is unmarketable and citing the sidewalk easement as proof of that fact. In a suit for specific performance, will the seller likely prevail? A: Yes, because the contract did not specify the quality of title to be conveyed. B: Yes, because the buyer was aware of the visible easement and it enhanced the value of the property. C: No, because an easement not provided for in the contract renders title unmarketable. D: No, because the buyer gave the seller sufficient notice of her change in plans and yet he made no effort to try to find another purchaser.
No, because an easement not provided for in the contract renders the title unmarketable.
The presence of an easement that was not addressed in the contract renders the title unmarketable, as stated in option C. As a result, the seller will not likely prevail in a suit for specific performance.
Specific performance is a legal concept where a court orders one party to perform a specific act. It is frequently employed in contract law cases. The goal of specific performance is to make the contract come to life. Specific performance is a legally binding contract remedy that allows a party to force the other party to perform their contractual obligations. According to the case mentioned, in a suit for specific performance, the seller is unlikely to prevail because an easement not provided for in the contract renders the title unmarketable. The buyer found out that there was an easement for the public sidewalk that ran in front of the store. Although it enhanced the value of the property, the buyer did not tell the seller about it.
The seller could hold the buyer to the contract, but the buyer refused to tender the purchase price because the title is unmarketable, citing the sidewalk easement as proof. Furthermore, the contract did not specify the quality of the title to be conveyed, nor did it mention easements or reservations.
Read more about valid binding contract in terms of performance here:
https://brainly.com/question/32959753
#SPJ11
Wilona was married to Wilbur for 40 years. She was devastated when he passed away. She had been very reliant on him and left all their business matters to him. She had always been a religious person and turned to her faith for solace.
She was visited by her local priest, Father Devout. She talked about her situation with him and concluded that she should sell her matrimonial home and move into a small unit. Father Devout was himself looking for a new home after the church had informed him that it would be selling the bungalow adjacent to the church building in which he currently lived as a cost- cutting exercise. He mentioned this fact in passing and Wilona insisted that she sell her house to him. When he asked how much she would want for the property, she said she had no idea of its worth. However, she had heard a neighbour say that a house in the street had sold for about $200,000, but, because she knew that her house would go to someone deserving, she would sell it to him for $100,000. This was in fact half its true value. She wouldn’t take no for an answer and Father Devout knew her to be someone who would obstinately insist on something once her mind was made up.
Wilona needed a bridging loan to purchase her unit. She does not trust banks and instead approached Sly, a fellow parishioner. Sly was a wealthy businessman, who told her he would give her the necessary funds if she signed a receipt for it so he ‘would have something to show the taxman’. In fact, the “receipt” was a basically-worded loan document, which provided that she was liable for interest at twice the rate that she could have obtained from a bank. Wilona signed the document without reading it because she thought Sly, as a fellow churchgoer, was “a good man”.
Wilona’s son and daughter have just flown in from their respective homes overseas and discovered what Wilona has been doing. They seek your advice on whether she can undo what she has done.
Advise Wilona’s children, discussing all available grounds for relief under Australian contract law.
Answer:whats the question
Explanation:
Answer:
A party is bound by the terms of a contract once it is signed whether or not the party has read or understood the terms in a contract (L'Estrange Rule). However, a signature is not binding where it was obtained by a fraud or misrepresentation, or where document was not known to be a contract by the party signing it (absence of "Intent".).
In the given case, there is a misrepresentation by Sly as a loan document was presented to Wilona as a tax receipt. Therefore, Wilona could repudiate the terms mentioned in the document.
Explanation:
A party is bound by the terms of a contract once it is signed whether or not the party has read or understood the terms in a contract (L'Estrange Rule). However, a signature is not binding where it was obtained by a fraud or misrepresentation, or where document was not known to be a contract by the party signing it (absence of "Intent".).
In the given case, there is a misrepresentation by Sly as a loan document was presented to Wilona as a tax receipt. Therefore, Wilona could repudiate the terms mentioned in the document.
1
Which statement best describes recent voter trends in the United States?
• A.
People living in the Midwest and the South mostly vote Democratic.
B.
Women since the 1950s mostly vote Republican.
C
People living on the US coasts mostly vote for conservative candidates.
D.
Cuban American families mostly vote Republican.
The correct answer is option (C) Women since the 1950s mostly votes Republican.
Why did Women since the 1950s mostly votes Republican?The Constitution was written in 1787, while the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776. There were other occasions when the United States was founded than these. These seven men—George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison—are regarded as the principal Founding Fathers in order of significance.
While many other people also played a part in the establishment of the United States, most people regard these seven to be the Founding Fathers. The Americas were found in 1492, according to Christopher Columbus.
To learn more about vote visit:
https://brainly.in/question/20481185
#SPJ13
What AR covers the policies and responsibilities of command, which include the Well-being of the force, military discipline, and conduct, the Army EO Program, and the Army Sexual Assault Victim Program?
AR 600-20 covers the policies and responsibilities of command, which address various aspects essential for maintaining a professional and effective Army. These aspects include the Well-being of the force, military discipline and conduct, the Army Equal Opportunity (EO) Program, and the Army Sexual Assault Victim Program.
The Well-being of the force ensures that soldiers have access to the necessary resources and support for their physical, emotional, and mental health. This holistic approach contributes to a more resilient and combat-ready force.
Military discipline and conduct are crucial for maintaining order and efficiency within the Army. AR 600-20 outlines standards for behavior, addressing issues such as insubordination and misconduct, while fostering a culture of professionalism and respect.
The Army EO Program aims to promote equal opportunity and eliminate discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender, or national origin. This program helps create an inclusive environment where everyone is treated fairly and has the opportunity to excel.
Lastly, the Army Sexual Assault Victim Program provides support to victims of sexual assault, ensuring their safety and well-being. This program emphasizes prevention, education, and appropriate response to sexual assault incidents, fostering a safe and respectful Army community.
In summary, AR 600-20 establishes guidelines and policies for command responsibilities, focusing on the well-being of soldiers, military discipline, equal opportunity, and support for sexual assault victims to maintain a professional and effective Army.
You can learn more about Military discipline at: brainly.com/question/30208301
#SPJ11