LAW COLLEGE

Select Yes if the item describes a society that functions under the rule of law.Select No if the item does not describe a society that functions under the rule of law.
People are treated equally under the law
V
Procedures for creating laws are done in private
People in government govern based on their wants/needs
Everyone must obey the laws
People are held accountable to the law

Answers

Answer 1
Answer:

Answer:

Yes

Explanation:

I don't think I have any explanation

Related Questions

After a long illness, your uncle dies. He leaves a sizeable estate but no will is found for several weeks. Finally, one of his ex-wives appears with a document she claims to be a valid will. It shows her and her children by him receiving most of his property. Your parents and the deceased's other children contest the will. Should the federal or state courts handle this case? Why? Which court in which system is most likely to hear it?
How is formal authority distinguished and give examples of each characteristic from the SAA case
Which of the following is NOT an affect of alcohol
A meeting could begin as a lawful assembly butdevelop into an unlawful one.TrueFalse
Demitri has noticed a friend of his talking to his girlfriend He can be very jealous. One day he decides to teach this friend a lesson. Demitri takes his baseball hat and hits the boy on the head. The boy falls to the ground and Demitri continues to hit him. Upon the realization that the boy is falling in and out of consciousness he calls 911 because he had no intention to cause such severe injury. If he faces criminal charges for beating his friend will he be able to successfully use the defense of abandonment?

Puzzle: Murder caseSolve this Murder case.....






Near Mangalore, a man was found murdred on 2-10-2013 wednesday afternon at 12:35 p.m. in his house...... His wife called police at 3:23 p.m..

Police questioned everyone..

Wife: I was sleeping..

son: i went for movies with my gf

Neighbours: We went 4 the marriage..

Driver: I went to atm withdraw cash..

Cook: I went to Wine shop to buy Wine..

gardener: i was in garden the whole time. i didnt hear anythng
.
Watch Man: I went to My relative's Marriage..

Police arrested the murderer immediately..♿▫

Who was it? ❓❔

"Reply with correct reason"
Ans !?❓

Answers

Answer:

it's the wife because if it was anyone else she would've heard them and called the police alot earlier
it’s most likely the wife, since if she knew that her husband died, then she would’ve called the police sooner. Or at least I think so....

over time, some of the measures of the usa patriot act have been challenged by state governments who do not wish to cooperate with the federal government. explain a concept of american government and politics that this action illustrates.

Answers

One concept of American government and politics that this action illustrates is:

  • The fact that it violates the 4th Amendment

Fourth Amendment

This refers to the amendment to the Constitution which protects the citizens from unlawful searches and seizures of their property.

The Patriot Act

This refers to the legislative act which was passed to protect the country from terrorist acts.

This has led some law enforcement to arbitrarily seize and search property that are suspected to be owned by terrorists and this violates the 4th Amendment.

Read more about 4th Amendment here:
brainly.com/question/3228820

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

Over time, some of the measures of the USA Patriot Act have been challenged by state governments who do not wish to cooperate with the federal government. A concept of American government and politics that this action illustrates could be that the state governors or the states legislatures consider that the Patriot Act violates the Constitution, specifically, it violates the 4th. Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. This amendment states that the federal government is not able to handle a search to any individual unless the government gets a warrant that says that there is some kind of proof that the person has committed a crime or there is enough evidence to suspect that the person is going to commit a crime.

The Patriot Act was enacted during the George W. Bush administration, after the terrible terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Since then, the act has created a lot of controversy in the nation.

Question 7 of 10Which situation would allow a country to increase the goods it imports
despite spending the same amount of money?
A. The country's government approved an increase in its trade deficit.
B. The country's currency experienced a major decline in interest
rates
C. The inflation rate of the country's currency increased
D. The exchange rate for the country's currency increased

Answers

If the nation's currency's exchange rate rose, the import increases while spending same amount.

So, option D. is correct.

Define import.

An import is a product or service purchased in one country but made in the other. Import is among the most important aspects of international trade.

If the nation's currency's exchange rate rose, it would help the country to import more items while spending the very same amount of money.

So, option D. is correct.

Find out more information about import here:

brainly.com/question/14099397?referrer=searchResults

Answer:

D. The exchange rate for the country's currency increased

Explanation:

a p e ex

One day, police officers were involved in a high-speed chase through city limits after a driver sped through a school zone. When they finally caught up with the driver, the police immediately arrested Betty at the scene. Because Betty was arrested at the scene and without a warrant, the court may hold a hearing during the first appearance to determine whether there was probable cause to arrest her. This hearing is known as:

a. Richardson hearing
b. Allen hearing
c. Lewis hearing
d. Gerstein hearing

Answers

Answer:

d. Gerstein hearing

Explanation:

  • Gerstein hearing is a process of hearing in which a court may summon an individual over criminal charges based on probable cause. The procedure of charging an individual with a criminal suit through a reasonable belief that the arrested individual is a potential criminal is called probable cause.
  • An individual may be summoned by a court for a Gerstein hearing even without a warrant to determine whether there was a probable cause to arrest his/her.

Revocation is the withdrawal of an offer by the offeror. True or False

Answers

The given statement "Revocation is the withdrawal of an offer by the offeror" is true.

Revocation is the withdrawal of an offer by the offeror before it has been accepted by the offeree. It is important to note that an offer can only be revoked before it has been accepted. Once an offer has been accepted, it becomes a binding contract and can no longer be revoked.

There are a few exceptions to the rule that an offer can only be revoked before it has been accepted. For example, an offer can be revoked if it is made under duress or if there is a mutual mistake of fact. Additionally, an offer can be revoked if it is made to a specific person and that person dies or becomes incapacitated.

Revocation of an offer can be done verbally or in writing. However, it is important to note that the revocation must be communicated to the offeree in order to be effective. If the revocation is not communicated to the offeree, the offer remains valid and can be accepted.

For such more question on Revocation

brainly.com/question/30333513

#SPJ6

Final answer:

Revocation is the withdrawal of an offer by the offeror in contract law.

Explanation:

Revocation in Contract Law

In contract law, revocation refers to the withdrawal of an offer by the offeror before it is accepted by the offeree. It is important to note that revocation can generally occur any time before acceptance, unless the offer includes an option contract or the offeror has made a firm promise to keep the offer open for a certain period.

For example, if a person offers to sell their car to another person and later changes their mind, they can revoke the offer as long as the other person has not accepted the offer yet.

Learn more about Revocation here:

brainly.com/question/30160947

#SPJ6

WILL MAKR BRAINLIESTPerson A is riding on a bus. Person B walks up to person A, and pulls out a knife, then says "Get out of MY seat or I'll stab you." What crimes, if any, have been committed? (Refer to legislation)

Answers

Answer:

threatening

Explanation:

no need. someone explained above
Other Questions
Which statement describes Max Weber's theory about power? a Power is distributed among many different elites and many government institutions, and no one elite or institution ever dominates government. b Power is held by an economic elite, the people who control the "means of production." c Power is concentrated among a "power elite" of top soldiers, bureaucrats, and businesspeople. d Power is held by bureaucrats and administrators.
Select the three legal requirements for mutual rescission to take place.
How many witnesses are required to convict someone of treason
Project: Lulu the Runaway DogProject Part A: Lulu the Runaway Dog Let's review the runaway dog example. When you see Lulu escape, you shout, "Come back, Lulu!" but Lulu the Labrador has already run through one neighbor's yard and is racing down the street. You decide that pursuing her in your fuel-efficient Focus would be the best course of action. However, you can't possibly end your phone conversation. After all, you are discussing the latest Dame Daisy video and analyzing it minute by minute. With your phone in one hand, car keys in the other, you rev up your car and head off to find Lulu. Jamie, Lulu's ten-year-old owner whom you are also babysitting, jumps in the car with you. As you are driving (a little faster than the speed limit) and talking on your phone, an annoying fly starts to buzz around your head. You shake your head and as you refocus and look ahead, there is Lulu—right in front of your car. You slam on your brakes and turn the wheels of the car sharply to the right with all your might to avoid hitting Lulu. A motorist opposite you drives onto the curb and bangs up the side of his car as he avoids hitting your vehicle. You slam into a utility pole, which was badly in need of repair, and knock it down. The pole hits a tree that smashes into a house and severely damages the front porch. Luckily, Lulu is fine. So is the motorist, who is very angry. Jamie is complaining that her wrist feels like it is all twisted. You cannot help thinking, "Oh boy, am I in trouble!" But you are "just a kid," right? Where do you start to sort out this mess? You start by contacting your cousin, Marjorie, who is a first-year law student at State University. You tell her every little detail you remember, including all events leading up to the accident. She wants to help you determine to whom you may have owed a duty of care and to whom you breached this duty. She sends you an email with the questions listed below. Please answer them. Marjorie's Questions: Who was involved in the accident? Did you owe a duty to anyone? If so, what duty or duties and to which particular individuals? Which duties did you breach? Were your actions the cause of any injuries? Were you actions an actual cause or a proximate cause, or both? For what damages could you be held liable? Are there any defenses against potential plaintiffs? If so, what are they? Provide a brief four- to five-paragraph answer. Project Part B: A Fire near Gidgits Galore Gidgits Galore borders a privately owned ten-acre forest. Pete owns the land. It is zoned "mixed," so businesses and residences can be found throughout the neighborhood. Through the forest is a multiresidence apartment building. Danny, a high-school senior who lives in one of the apartments, has crammed all night for his economics final and needs a break. He has decided to take a morning walk down one of the forest's paths, prodding the piles of leaves and clumps of moss with his walking stick. He sees what appeared to be a recently-used campfire, and pokes around it with his stick. As he wanders farther, he doesn't realize that he has reignited the fire. To make matters worse, it is unexpectedly windy that day. As the wind picks up, the flames leap over 200 feet to a storage shed used by the apartment building's maintenance workers. One of them, Don, has just arrived to get his lawnmower. He calls 911. While waiting, he tries to extinguish the flames with his jacket, but he stops when his work shirt catches fire. The flames also reach the tent of Cassie, the camper who lit the campfire the previous night. Cassie thought she had extinguished the fire as she set up her tent nearby. Cassie wakes up coughing from smoke inhalation and manages to exit the tent before it is destroyed by fire. One of Gidgits Galore's managers, Dianne, arrives to open up the store but is detoured by the smoke she sees in the distance. Soon she too is overwhelmed by its acrid smell, which brings on a severe asthma attack. As quickly as the flames started, the wind stops, and they die down. Firefighters who arrive on the scene are able to quickly extinguish the fire. You are a member of a mock jury in a negligence case. As a juror, one of your duties is to find the facts from the evidence presented and determine if there is enough evidence to show that the defendant was negligent. Sort out the facts in the present case. Prepare a brief argument (three to four paragraphs) outlining why Danny could be held negligent against the potential plaintiffs listed below. Don the maintenance worker Cassie the camper Dianne the GidgitsGalore employee Pete the landowner Prepare a brief argument (two to three paragraphs) showing why Danny's conduct did not amount to negligence against any of the potential plaintiffs listed above.