Answer:
d. the civil service system based on merit and neutral competence
Explanation:
what of the Specific, possessory lien of the bailee upon the goods for work done to them. Commonly extended by statue to any bailee's claim for compensation, eliminating the necessity of retention.
The specific, possessory lien of the bailee upon the goods for work done to them is commonly extended by statute to any bailee's claim for compensation, eliminating the necessity of retention.
A bailee, who is in the possession of another person's goods for the purpose of carrying out the work, has a specific and possessory lien on the goods for any compensation due for the work done to them. This means that the bailee can keep the goods until the compensation is paid.
The law in many jurisdictions recognizes this lien and gives it priority over any other lien or interest. To protect this lien, the bailee has the right to retain possession of the goods until the compensation is paid. This is known as the right of retention.
The right of retention is eliminated by statute, which extends the lien of the bailee upon the goods for work done to them to any bailee's claim for compensation. This means that the bailee is entitled to claim compensation for any work done to the goods without having to retain possession of the goods.
To know more about jurisdictions visit: brainly.com/question/10377896
#SPJ11
Stop Building the Wall
3 Pros and 3 cons
Answer:
The immediate withdrawal of building a border wall would bring some benefits. First, it would allow people who are asylum seekers to come. Secondly, it would redistribute more resources to the Department of Homeland Security. Finally, it would save the American people millions of dollars.
In contrast, the three cons of not having a border wall would be a possible increase in crime. Secondly, the flood of undocumented persons. Finally, as a country, we would be vulnerable to attack by any of our enemies on the world stage.
Explanation:
I hope this helps you develop your idea further.
according to the results of the study conducted by barlow et al., all neutralization techniques have the same impact on the likelihood of rule violation. group of answer choices true false
The statement is True, according to the results of the study conducted by Barlow et al., all neutralization techniques have the same impact on the likelihood of rule violation.
A violation refers to an act or behavior that goes against established rules, laws, or norms. It is an instance where someone fails to adhere to the expected standards or conditions set by a particular system or authority. Violations can occur in various domains, such as legal, ethical, social, or organizational contexts.
In legal terms, a violation often refers to the breach of a specific law or regulation. It can range from minor infractions like traffic violations to more serious offenses such as theft or assault. Violations of ethical standards involve actions that contravene moral principles or codes of conduct, such as dishonesty or plagiarism. Social violations can include actions that disrupt social norms or conventions, like inappropriate behavior in public or rudeness towards others.
To know more about Violation refer to-
brainly.com/question/31558707
#SPJ4
When examining gender differences in status offenses, research shows that gils are
© A. taken into custody LESS often than are boys
O B, MORE likely to run away because of victimization in the home
O C, MORE likely to be considered incorrigible than are boys
O D, MORE llkely to be involyed in underage drinking than are boys
© E, MORE likely to be truant than are boys
During the examination of gender difference, research illustrates that girls are A. taken into custody less often than are boys.
What is gender difference?It should be noted that gender difference simply means the difference that exists between males and females.
In this case, when examining gender differences in status offenses, research shows that gils are taken into custody less often than are boys.
Learn more about gender on:
https://brainly.com/question/1087314
this is legislation passed in the aftermath of 9/11 that expanded law enforcement agencies authority for the purpose of fighting terrorism called?
Answer:
USA PATRIOT Act 2001
Explanation:
The United States Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act, also referred to as the Patriot Act, and President George W. Bush signed it into law. The official name of the law is the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Needed to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001, but the more informal moniker is a made-up acronym that is incorporated into the official name.
Following the September 11 attacks and the anthrax attacks in 2001, the Patriot Act was passed with the declared purpose of bolstering American national security, particularly with regard to international terrorism. The act generally contained three key provisions:
Expanded surveillance powers for law enforcement, including the ability to tap both domestic and foreign phones; improved interagency coordination to enable federal agencies to more efficiently use all resources in counterterrorism efforts; stiffer penalties for terrorism-related crimes; and a longer list of actions that would be grounds for terrorism charges.
Which of the following is not sufficient grounds for revoking a medical license?conviction of a felonyfalsifying medical recordsmisdiagnosispersonal incapacityunprofessional conduct
Misdiagnosis is not sufficient grounds for revoking a medical license.
What is license?A license is a legal agreement that grants permission to use a specific product, service, or intellectual property. It is essentially a contract between a licensor and a licensee, where the licensor grants the licensee a set of rights to use their intellectual property in exchange for a fee or other form of compensation. A license can be for a one-time fee or a recurring fee, depending on the type of product or service being licensed. The license agreement also outlines the terms and conditions of the use of the intellectual property, including any restrictions or limitations.
To learn more about license
https://brainly.com/question/30028899
#SPJ4
A 15-year old boy enters your clinic requesting treatment for scalds received on his hand while emptying the dishwasher at his place of employment. Although his family receives medical treatment at the clinic, you are uncertain about seeing him without his parents' knowledge. Can he consent to treatment? What are the legal ramifications?
Answer:
They have the right in some cases.
Explanation:
Teens have the right to give consent for treatment but only to a certain extent like getting HIV testing, contraceptives, and ... education. Legally after age 12 the children.
Which of the following is the lowest category for an offense resulting in the death of another person?
- Manslaughter
- Murder
- Capital murder
- Criminally negligent homicide
Answer:
Criminally negligent Homicide
Hope this helps
Explanation:
Why might it be difficult to prosecute a citizen who violates its laws outside its borders, when the offence is not illegal in the country he or she is visiting?
Answer:
Anyone who commits a crime outside their country will be punished according to the local law of the receiving country. This has happened before for other Americans, some of whom made international headlines because of the crimes they were accused of. I think
Explanation:
Do terminally ill patients have the right to end their lives?
Answer:
yes
Explanation:
Yes they do if they can not deal with it anymore they can. It is there right and their descioson.
how is federalism seen throughtout the judical branch?
Answer:
interprets the Constitution and ensures the provisions are followed
Explanation:
The judiciary is such a body that interprets the Constitution and ensures the provisions are followed. Besides, in federal states, disputes between the Centre and States are common and natural. The judiciary also resolves the disputes between the Centre and States as well as between the States.
An officer has made application for a court order approving electronic surveillance of Defendant. The order is granted, stating: "From June 1 to June 7, Officer X, having established probable cause, is granted the authority to intercept the wire communications of Defendant." The officer proceeded to enter Defendant’s house, without a warrant, to install the listening device. Eventually, a recording is made of Defendant discussing his illegal activities with a friend. Defendant is arrested, charged, and has filed a motion to suppress the interception. Defendant asserts that the entry into his house was illegal. Discuss.
Answer:
he wasn't granted permission to enter the home
Explanation:
he was granted right to monitor not break in to his home
Which of the following is NOT TRUE regarding the placement of a child in the least restrictive
environment?
The statement which is not true relating to put a child in the least restrictive environment which contains general education in itself.
First option is correct.
What is placement?Placement is the action taken to indulge the child in any school, college or university where he/she can learn and develop their skills.
According to the provided options, the least restrictive environment , that is, a kind of scenario where the child is not being scolded more on their mistakes and providing general education to child in school will not always be a least restrictive environment. It totally depends the culture and values of the school.
Question's missing part:
The options are as follows:
1) The general education environment is always the least restrictive environment.
2) There is a presumption in favor of inclusion.
3) A continuum of placement options should be considered.
4) It includes extracurricular activities.
Therefore, the explanation written in first option is correct.
Learn more about the placement in the related link:
https://brainly.com/question/19670400
#SPJ2
the landmark supreme court ruling that allows stop and frisk procedures is
The landmark Supreme Court ruling that allows stop and frisk procedures is the Terry v. Ohio case, decided in 1968. This decision established that police officers can stop and briefly detain a person based on reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity, and frisk them for weapons if the officer believes they might be armed and dangerous. This ruling balances the need for public safety with individual rights under the Fourth Amendment, providing law enforcement with a tool to prevent potential crimes while still respecting personal privacy.
The landmark Supreme Court ruling that allows stop and frisk procedures is Terry v. Ohio. In this 1968 case, the court established that police officers may stop and briefly detain an individual if they have reasonable suspicion that the person is involved in criminal activity. If during the stop the officer has reasonable suspicion that the individual is armed and dangerous, they may conduct a frisk of the individual's outer clothing to search for weapons. This ruling has been controversial, with critics arguing that it can lead to racial profiling and violations of civil liberties. Nevertheless, it remains a landmark decision that has shaped police practices and constitutional law in the United States.
To know more about Terry v. Ohio visit:
https://brainly.com/question/29543768
#SPJ11
Evaluate the following statement: “If a signature on a check is forged, the customer will never be responsible for the amount on the check.”
This assignment is a written essay containing 500 words covering the topic below. The essay must be at least 500 words or more and written in proper APA format. This will require a cover page, body narrative, and a reference page. NOTE: The cover page and the reference page DO NOT count towards the 500 words. Remember this is APA only, it must contain in-text citations and properly cited references. DO NOT use wikipedia, no new articles, news agencies, no news channels, or magazines. These are not credible sources. Make sure the question is answered completely. You can use the book as a reference and other reliable sources.
Your completed assignment will be uploaded through canvas. Also, please do not use Essay Chapter 4 as part of your title. It is recommended that you create your own essay title. Something that you create out of your own words and thoughts.
Topic:
A man and his wife leave a nightclub and are confronted by a robber wielding a knife as they reach their car. The robber threatens to kill them if they do not give him all their money and jewelry. The husband assures the robber that he left his wallet in the car. The robber tells him to retrieve the wallet, but to be careful because he will kill the man’s wife if he tries any tricks. The man actually retrieves a loaded pistol; turns and fires the weapon; killing the suspect.
Question:
What charges will be filed against the man, if any? Does the husband rely on lawful use of force? Why? Why not?
Answer:
Title: The Legality of Using Deadly Force in Self-Defense: A Case Study
In the scenario presented, a man and his wife were confronted by a robber wielding a knife as they reached their car. The robber threatened to kill them if they did not hand over all their money and jewelry. The husband then retrieved a loaded pistol, turned and fired the weapon, killing the suspect. The question now is what charges will be filed against the man, if any, and whether the husband relied on lawful use of force.
In most jurisdictions, the use of deadly force is justified only when it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to oneself or another person. In this case, the husband could argue that he used deadly force to protect himself and his wife from the robber who was armed with a knife and had threatened to kill them. However, the use of deadly force is not justified if the attacker no longer poses an imminent threat, and the use of non-lethal force or retreat would be a reasonable option.
Moreover, the husband's use of deadly force may also be justified under the "castle doctrine," which allows individuals to use deadly force to protect themselves and their property against intruders in their own homes. However, in this case, the incident occurred outside of the couple's car, which is not considered their home, and the use of deadly force may not be justified under this doctrine.
Depending on the state, the husband may be required to retreat or use non-lethal force if he can do so safely, instead of using deadly force. However, in some states, such as the "stand your ground" states, individuals have no duty to retreat and may use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.
Therefore, the legality of the husband's use of deadly force in this case depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred. If the use of deadly force is deemed lawful, then no charges will be filed against the husband. However, if the use of deadly force is not justified under the law, then the husband may be charged with various criminal offenses, such as manslaughter or murder.
In conclusion, the legality of using deadly force in self-defense is a complex issue that depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred. In this case, the husband could argue that he used deadly force to protect himself and his wife from the robber who was armed with a knife and had threatened to kill them. However, whether the husband relied on lawful use of force depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred.
The physiological effects of marijuana greatly differ from those associated with alcohol.
True
Or
False
Answer:
True
Explanation:
alcohol is a depressant and marijuana is a stimulant
Based on the facts of the previous question, Jay stays in the hospital for a few days as he is recuperating. Then, a couple of weeks after he gets released from the hospital, Jay receives a bill from the hospital for $10,000 for his medical care. If this went to court, the judge would probably describe this situation as:________.
a. a bilateral contract, enforceable against Jay.
b. a unilateral contract, enforceable against Jay.
c. an implied contract, enforceable against Jay.
d. no contract at all. Jay should not have to pay anything.
Answer: c. an implied contract, enforceable against Jay.
Explanation:
An Implied contracts is usually between physician and a patient this contracts do not state the course of action or payment at the start or inception of the service. Example, a medical examination usually takes place the moment a patient's request for it, this tests are usually either at the patients home or at the medical facility where the doctor practices. After the examination a course of action or payment is decided. Same applies to Jay after been treated and discharged from the hospital a course of action or payment may be made.
Compared to the president of the United States and other state governors, the governor of Texas has less power. Which of the following create limitations on the governor of Texas that are not present on the president or other governors?
-the plural executive
-the Constitution of 1876
-limited power of appointment
The limitations on the governor of Texas that are not present on the president or other governors are the plural executive and the Constitution of 1876.
The Constitution of 1876 of Texas and the plural executive are the two main reasons why the Governor of Texas has less power compared to the president of the United States and other state governors.The plural executive is a system that limits the power of the Governor of Texas. This is because the other major executive branches officials, such as the lieutenant governor, attorney general, and comptroller of public accounts, are all elected independently of the governor. This means that they do not have to depend on the governor to remain in office. Therefore, the governor cannot remove them from their positions.The Texas Constitution of 1876 was written to limit the power of the Governor of Texas. It accomplished this by creating three branches of government and dividing the powers of each branch. Therefore, this ensured that no single branch of government could have too much power.In addition, the Constitution of 1876 made it difficult to change the constitution. This means that the power of the governor cannot be expanded without first amending the constitution. As a result, the governor of Texas has less power compared to the president of the United States and other state governors. The limited power of appointment is also a limitation on the governor of Texas. This is because the governor can only appoint people to specific positions that have been authorized by the legislature.In conclusion, the limitations on the governor of Texas that are not present on the president or other governors are the plural executive and the Constitution of 1876.Learn more about Constitution of 1876: https://brainly.com/question/30667966
#SPJ11
When making ethical decisions on behalf of your employer, should you consider the impact on others outside your employer? If so, who and why?
Please help me
In a situation in which I have to make ethical decisions on behalf of my employer, I should consider the impact of the people who are involved because my ethical behavior would be involved despite being on behalf of my employer.
Ethics is a term to refer to a subdiscipline of philosophy that focuses on the study of human behavior, its relationship with:
The notions of right and wrongThe moral preceptsDutyThe happinessThe common welfareAccording to the above, in a situation in which I must make an ethical decision on behalf of my boss, I must consider the impact that it will have on other people because my ethical actions will influence my decision. For example:
If my boss tells me that I should fire a co-worker because the company has lowered its profits, surely he considers that this is an ethical act for his benefit and his interests.However, I know that my partner depends on the salary he earns in the company and that he and his family would be affected by this decision. Then I could not fire him because he would be doing him a bad thing.Learn more in: https://brainly.com/question/2630782
Can a supreme court justice be impeached and removed.
Answer: The Constitution states that Justices "shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour." This means that the Justices hold office as long as they choose and can only be removed from office by impeachment. Has a Justice ever been impeached? The only Justice to be impeached was Associate Justice Samuel Chase in 1805.
Explanation:
if you were the chairman of Nepal Disabled women Association what plan would you make for the Disabled women's welfare and make them independent? prepare a detail plan.
Answer:
1 :Provide vocational training to make them independent.
2:Give them support.
3:Conduct awareness programmes.
4: As a chairperson I will try as much as I can provide them their rights.
5: Provide decision makin power.
6: Leverage technology to develop skills.
7: Provide training to improve the required skills for independence.
8: Consider options for learning, employment or volunteering.
what were the major factors that led to the rise of political divisions during george washington’s time in office?
The major factors that led to the rise of political divisions during George Washington’s time in office were the differing views on federal power, the role of government in the economy, and foreign policy.
The United States of America's first president, George Washington, was in office between 1789 and 1797. He was faced with various challenges that eventually led to the development of political divisions.
The following are the major factors that led to the rise of political divisions during George Washington’s time in office:
Differing views on federal power: The country's founding fathers had varying opinions on how much power the federal government should have. Those who favored a stronger central government formed the Federalist Party. Meanwhile, those who believed that the states should have more control over their affairs formed the Democratic-Republican Party.The role of government in the economy: The Federalists believed in a strong government that should have control over the country's economy. They favored tariffs, national banks, and federal debt. Conversely, the Democratic-Republicans believed in a weaker government that should have less involvement in the economy.Foreign policy: The United States of America's founding fathers had varying opinions on foreign policy. The Federalists believed in maintaining friendly relations with Great Britain. On the other hand, the Democratic-Republicans believed in a more isolationist foreign policy and favored France during their revolutionary wars.Therefore factors that give rise to political divisions are foreign policy, role of government in the economy and different views on federal power.
Learn more about political divisions https://brainly.com/question/11126401
#SPJ11
Under which of the following circumstances is parol evidence inadmissible in court?
Question content area bottom
Part 1
A.
when the parol evidence explains ambiguous language
B.
when the parol evidence corrects an obvious clerical or typographical error
C.
when the parol evidence shows that a contract is voidable
D.
when the parol evidence shows that a contract is void
E.
when the parol evidence conflicts with the terms of the written contract
Parol evidence is inadmissible in court when it conflicts with the terms of the written contract. Option E is the correct answer.
The parol evidence rule generally prohibits the introduction of external evidence, such as oral or written statements made prior to or alongside a written contract, that contradicts or varies the terms of the written agreement.
The purpose of this rule is to maintain the integrity and enforceability of written contracts by preventing parties from introducing extrinsic evidence to alter or add to the written terms. However, there are exceptions to this rule, such as when the parol evidence explains ambiguous language or corrects clerical errors.
To know more about Parol Evidence visit:
brainly.com/question/31600066
#SPJ11
15 A search warrant can force someone to have surgery to retrieve a bullet as long as probable cause exists. QA True B. False Reset Next
The answer to the question which asks if a search warrant can force someone to have surgery to retrieve a bullet as long as probable cause exists is:
No, it cannot.What is a Search Warrant?This refers to the judicial order which allows law enforcement officials to enter a property and execute a search based on reasonable or probable cause.
With this in mind, we can see that a search warrant does not have to do with the removal of a foreign object from the body of a person as this is completely illogical and can endanger the live of the person.
Read more about search warrant here:
https://brainly.com/question/3228820
Answer:
false
Explanation:
I took the quiz
Which refers to the fact that it takes time for the government to decide what to do? A.Recognition lag B.Administrative lag C.Operational lag D.Political lag
Answer:
D or A
Explanation:
:)
What kinds of control are available legislatures? Needs to be 5 sentences
Answer:
1. Financial authority: Legislators have the authority to approve budgets and allocate funding to various programs and initiatives.
2. Legislative authority: Legislators have the authority to create and pass laws that govern numerous parts of society.
3. Oversight control: Legislators can investigate and oversee government agencies to ensure they are operating properly.
4. Appointment control: Legislators have the authority to confirm or reject appointments made by the executive branch.
5. Impeachment control: Through the impeachment process, legislatures can remove public officials from office.
All of these checks and balances are necessary for the legislature to keep the government working properly and citizens' rights safeguarded.
do u like jazz i do what abt u
Answer:
Explanation:
what is your question?
Answer:
Yes I like jazz ;)
Do u like bees?
Explanation:
in wisconsin v. yoder (1972) how did the supreme court's decision address state interests and individual rights?
In the case of Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), the Supreme Court's decision addressed both state interests and individual rights in the context of religious freedom.
The case involved Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, members of the Amish community in Wisconsin, who refused to send their children to school beyond the eighth grade as it conflicted with their religious beliefs and way of life. The state of Wisconsin had a compulsory school attendance law that required children to attend school until the age of 16.
In its decision, the Supreme Court considered the tension between the state's interest in providing education and the Amish parents' claim of religious freedom. The Court recognized that the state had a legitimate interest in ensuring an educated citizenry and promoting the welfare of its children through compulsory education laws.
However, the Court also acknowledged the constitutional protection of the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. It recognized that the Amish community's religious beliefs and practices were deeply held and central to their way of life. The Court weighed the burden imposed on the Amish parents' exercise of their religious beliefs against the state's interest in compulsory education.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court sided with the Amish parents and held that the state's interest in compulsory education did not outweigh the individual's right to free exercise of religion in this particular case. The Court found that the Amish community's alternative forms of education, which focused on vocational skills and the transmission of their values and traditions, adequately prepared their children for Amish life and did not unduly harm the children or society.
The Court's decision in Wisconsin v. Yoder established a precedent that recognized the importance of accommodating religious beliefs and practices, even if they diverged from generally applicable laws. It emphasized that the state's interest must be balanced against the individual's right to religious freedom, particularly when the religious practice is deeply rooted in tradition and has a compelling community interest.
In summary, the Supreme Court's decision in Wisconsin v. Yoder addressed state interests in compulsory education and individual rights to religious freedom. It recognized the importance of accommodating religious beliefs and practices when they are deeply held, central to a community's way of life, and alternative arrangements can adequately serve the state's interests.
Learn more about Supreme Court here
https://brainly.com/question/341135
#SPJ11
licensing refers to a contractual agreement in which the licensor grants access to its patents, trade secrets, or technology for a fee paid by the licensee. True or False?
A licensing refers to a contractual agreement in which the licensor grants access to its patents, trade secrets, or technology for a fee paid by the licensee. The given statement is "True."
What is licensing, In other words, Licensing is a business model that enables a business to use another firm's intellectual property for commercial purposes. Licenses allow companies to enter new markets, obtain competitive advantages, and add revenue streams to their businesses.
It's a type of revenue-sharing agreement in which the license holder agrees to pay a fee to the licensor in exchange for the right to use the licensor's intellectual property.
therefore the correct statement is "True."
For more such questions on licensing
brainly.com/question/24827828
#SPJ11