If the advocate of closure proves that there is substantial probability that some harm may occur to an overriding interest by keeping a hearing or a document open, then the judge must Consider whether there are other alternatives to closure of the hearing or the document.
The four most popular approaches to probability are classical, empirical, subjective, and axiomatic. Information about the possibility that something will happen is provided by probability. For instance, meteorologists use weather patterns to forecast the likelihood of rain. Probability theory is utilized in epidemiology to comprehend the connection between exposures and the risk of health outcomes. the likelihood that a specific occurrence will occur. the proportion of all conceivable outcomes to the number of outcomes in an exhaustive set of equally likely outcomes that result in a certain event. The probability of an event occurring is known as probability. This might range from an occurrence being impossible to having a chance to happen to being certain for sure. Probability is measured mathematically on a scale from 0 to 1. Three main categories of probability exist: Probability in theory. Scientific Probability. Probability axiomatically.
Learn more about probability here
https://brainly.com/question/24756209
#SPJ4
Which of the following statements about common law are not true? (Select all that apply
Common few refers to the fact that judges can only look at written taw to make a decision
Common law evokes in part based on decisions in court cases
Common law means that laws can change based on prevailing behaviors and trends.
Common law means that only written bws can be interpreted by judges.
Common law is the belief that all citizens must follow due process
Answer:
2 & 3 I think
Explanation:
The statements about common law are not true is
Common law is the belief that all citizens must follow due process.Common law means that laws can change based on prevailing behaviors and trends.What is Law?A law is referred to as a set of rules and regulations, guidelines given in the constitution and implemented by the ruling government to maintain cordial relationships among people and helps to conduct the functioning of any country properly.
The set of decisions created by judges and legal procedures starting in the Middle Ages is known as common law. there was not a codified system of laws, instead that there were historical policies and procedures that guided current legal choices.
This method of approaching the law is still employed by the American legal system, which uses earlier cases to guide present-day judgments.
Learn more about Common Law, here:
https://brainly.com/question/8476406
#SPJ2
Which activity is probably NOT related to
interstate commerce?
Abusing household pets and other
domestic animals
Breeding animals for use in national
research facilities
Answer:
Breeding animals for use in national
research facilities
Explanation:
Interstate Commerce is related to the imports and exports of goods from state to state. This is an example of interstate commerce, and Congress has doesn't have the power to impose any tax on that kind of import or export, as stated in the US Constiution.
Mark Brainliest Please!
Using F. R. C. P. As your guide, please explain the different requirements for serving a summons, subpoena, or complaint as opposed to serving pleadings and other documents such as motions.
Please cite the appropriate rule provisions
Answer:
Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (F.R.C.P.), there are different requirements for serving a summons, subpoena, or complaint as opposed to serving pleadings and other documents such as motions. The following are the requirements for each type of document:
Summons: According to Rule 4 of the F.R.C.P., a summons must be served with a copy of the complaint. The summons must be served within 90 days after the complaint is filed with the court. The service of the summons must be made by a non-party who is at least 18 years old and not a party to the action.
Subpoena: Rule 45 of the F.R.C.P. governs the service of subpoenas. A subpoena must be served on the person named in the subpoena. The service of the subpoena may be made by a non-party who is at least 18 years old and not a party to the action.
Complaint: Rule 5 of the F.R.C.P. governs the service of complaints. A complaint must be served on each defendant along with a summons. The service of the complaint may be made by a non-party who is at least 18 years old and not a party to the action.
Pleadings and other documents such as motions: Rule 5 of the F.R.C.P. governs the service of pleadings and other documents such as motions. The service of these documents may be made by mail, electronic means, or in person. The service may be made by a party or a non-party.
Explanation:
It's important to note that the requirements for serving a summons, subpoena, or complaint are more stringent than those for serving pleadings and other documents such as motions. For example, the service of a summons must be made in person, while the service of pleadings and other documents may be made by mail or electronic means.
Overall, the F.R.C.P. provides detailed guidance on the proper methods for serving various legal documents in a civil action, and it's important to follow these rules to ensure that the service is legally valid.
Why were the Airbus actions a violation of the US Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act?
The Airbus actions violated the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act due to bribery of foreign officials and accounting irregularities.
The Airbus actions were considered a violation of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) due to several reasons. The FCPA is a US law that prohibits bribery of foreign officials and requires accurate record-keeping by companies with securities listed on US stock exchanges. Here's why the Airbus actions were deemed a violation:
Bribery: Airbus was found to have engaged in corrupt practices by offering and paying bribes to foreign officials and intermediaries to secure business contracts and gain competitive advantages. These bribes were intended to influence the decision-making of foreign officials, which directly contravenes the FCPA's anti-bribery provisions.Accounting Irregularities: The FCPA also requires accurate and transparent financial reporting. Airbus was discovered to have engaged in accounting irregularities, including misrepresenting payments, disguising bribes as legitimate business expenses, and maintaining inadequate internal controls. These actions not only violated the FCPA's accounting provisions but also undermined the integrity of financial statements and hindered proper corporate governance.Jurisdictional Reach: The FCPA applies to any company or individual, regardless of their nationality, if they engage in corrupt practices within the jurisdiction of the United States. Since Airbus is a global company with a significant presence in the US, its actions fell within the FCPA's jurisdiction.In summary, the Airbus actions violated the FCPA through bribery, accounting irregularities, and the jurisdictional reach of the law. These violations undermine the principles of fair competition, transparency, and ethical business practices that the FCPA aims to uphold.
Know more about FCPA here:
https://brainly.com/question/30626255
#SPJ8
The containment policy articulated by george f. Kennan in 1947 proposed.
Answer:
What policy was proposed by George F. Kennan What does containment mean?
Containment was a foreign policy strategy followed by the United States during the Cold War. First laid out by George F. Kennan in 1947, the policy stated that communism needed to be contained and isolated, or else it would spread to neighboring countries.
Explanation:
Demitri served time in a federal prison. He was sentenced to 124 months of incarceration followed by 24 months of probation. He served roughly 48 months in prison followed by the full 24 months of probation. During his term of imprisonment, what type of sentencing scheme was likely in place?
Answer:
universities from use for military purposes. The examples in this report of law, policy, and doctrine protecting … Education from Attack, of which Human Rights Watch is a member. That number represents the majority of countries … (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, August 12, 1949. Protocol I Additional …
It is the responsibility of the legislative branch to
O carry out the laws.
O enforce the laws.
O create the laws.
O interpret the laws.
Answer:
The responsibility of the legislative branch is to
create the laws.
identify the characteristics of civil versus criminal cases. question 2 options: plaintiff brings the case. when a defendant is found guilty, the court may order a punishment that includes a fine, restitution, imprisonment, or forfeiture. the plaintiff seeks money, an injunction, or specific performance. the objective is to punish those who committed wrongdoing. the objective is to settle disputes between parties peacefully. liability is established by preponderance of evidence. prosecutor brings the case. guilt is established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Civil cases: Plaintiff seeks resolution or compensation, preponderance of evidence, and objective is peaceful dispute settlement. Criminal cases: Prosecutor seeks punishment, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and objective is to punish wrongdoers.
In civil cases, the plaintiff brings the case seeking monetary compensation, an injunction, or specific performance. The objective is to settle disputes between parties peacefully. Liability is established by a preponderance of evidence, meaning that it is more likely than not that the defendant is responsible for the harm caused. The court may order remedies such as monetary damages or specific actions to be taken.
In criminal cases, the prosecutor brings the case on behalf of the state or government. The objective is to punish those who have committed wrongdoing. When a defendant is found guilty, the court may order punishments such as fines, restitution, imprisonment, or forfeiture. Guilt in criminal cases is established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a higher standard of evidence compared to civil cases.
In summary:
Civil cases:
- Plaintiff brings the case seeking compensation or resolution.
- Objective is to settle disputes peacefully.
- Liability is established by a preponderance of evidence.
Criminal cases:
- Prosecutor brings the case on behalf of the state.
- Objective is to punish wrongdoers.
- Guilt is established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Learn more about Criminal cases
https://brainly.com/question/31580381
#SPJ11
Scott Jensen owned two hundred acres of farmland in California. A creek flowed through the land, and Jensen used water from the creek to irrigate his crops. The water was adequate for his needs. Wesley Sarvis purchased farmland upstream from Jensen's property and began using water from the creek to irrigate. Claiming that he had exclusive rights to the water, Jensen filed a lawsuit in a California state court against Sarvis for using the water. The court held that Jensen and Sarvis had to divide their water use equally and that each of them was entitled to use the water every other week. Fifty years later, a similar dispute arose between two more California farmers. Bo Ellis lived upstream from Faye Deason. Deason claimed that she had exclusive rights to the water and filed a lawsuit in a California state court against Ellis for his use of the water. In the second case, Deason v. Ellis, the court will most likely:
In the second case, Deason v. Ellis, the court will most likely apply stare decisis and divide the water rights because the facts of the two cases are similar.
What are facts?It should be noted that facts simply means the evidence that are presented in a literary work or a research.
In this case, in the second case, Deason v. Ellis, the court will most likely apply stare decisis and divide the water rights because the facts of the two cases are similar.
Learn more about facts on:
brainly.com/question/25465770
#SPJ4
the ""actual malice"" standard comes into play in a libel suit:______.
The "actual malice" standard comes into play in a libel suit when the plaintiff is a public figure or a public official and seeks to prove that the defendant made false statements with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.
In a libel suit involving a public figure or public official, the "actual malice" standard, established by the landmark Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), sets a higher burden of proof. The plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant made false statements while knowing that they were false or exhibiting reckless disregard for the truth. This standard recognizes the importance of protecting freedom of speech and press, placing the responsibility on the plaintiff to prove the defendant's actual malice in making defamatory statements.
Ordinary citizens, who are not public figures or public officials, are generally held to a lower standard in libel cases, where they only need to establish negligence or a failure to exercise reasonable care in verifying the truth of the statements.
To learn more about Actual Malice, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/8961894
#SPJ11
The "actual malice" standard comes into play in a libel suit when the plaintiff is a public figure or a public official and seeks to prove that the defendant made false statements with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.
In a libel suit involving a public figure or public official, the "actual malice" standard, established by the landmark Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), sets a higher burden of proof. The plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant made false statements while knowing that they were false or exhibiting reckless disregard for the truth. This standard recognizes the importance of protecting freedom of speech and press, placing the responsibility on the plaintiff to prove the defendant's actual malice in making defamatory statements.
Ordinary citizens, who are not public figures or public officials, are generally held to a lower standard in libel cases, where they only need to establish negligence or a failure to exercise reasonable care in verifying the truth of the statements.
To learn more about Actual Malice, click here:
brainly.com/question/8961894
#SPJ11
Alice and Bertie are the beneficiaries of a trust established for them by their father, Chester.
They are concerned about possible mismanagement of the trust by the trustees, Doug and Ella, and seek your advice on the following matters, which they have just discovered:
In 2014 Doug received a tip from his friend Racey that a particular horse would win the Derby horse race at Epsom. Doug placed £100,000 of trust money on the horse which subsequently won, earning £400,000 in winnings. Doug placed £100,000 of the winnings back into the Trust’s account held at ‘Nasty Bank Plc’ and paid the remaining £300,000 into his own bank account held at the same bank, where he already held £50,000 of his own money.
In 2015 Doug sold Pretty Cottage, which formed part of the trust’s property, to his sister, Mia, for £10,000.
In 2016 Doug and his wife Tandi went on a round the world trip for two years. Their trip cost £200,000 and was funded from monies held in Doug’s bank account.
In 2018 Doug died and Ella refuses to accept liability for any of the problems outlined above. She claims that she left all the decisions to Doug because he said he had experience of managing trusts.
Advise Alice and Bertie od any breaches of trust and where liability for them lies...
Ethics in workplace between Employer and Employee
When making ethical decisions on behalf of your employer, should you consider the impact those decisions may have on others outside your employer? If so, who and why?
Then consider ‘what if’ decisions made by your employer conflicted with your own morals and ethics. What would you do? What should you do? Explain why and provide real life examples if you have ever experienced this type of conflict.
Absolutely, an ethical choice made by the employer should take into account how it will affect all parties involved, including the community, suppliers, and customers.
What choices do stakeholders make in an ethical manner?Stakeholder-based ethical decision-making offers a framework for assessing the available options or alternatives. Prior to making a decision, this strategy also calls for a knowledge of the potential effects on all of the stakeholders.
What effect does work ethics have on both employers and employees?A company that implements a workplace ethics programme aligns employee behaviour. This encourages transparency, collaboration, and trust as a result. Also, workers perform better at their professions when they are aware of the expectations of their superiors.
To know more about ethical visit:-
https://brainly.com/question/11992384
#SPJ1
When pursuing an adverse impact claim, an individual is alleging:
a. Unintentional discrimination against an individual.
b. Intentional discrimination against an individual.
c. Unintentional discrimination against a protected class.
d. Intentional discrimination against a protected class.
When pursuing an adverse impact claim, an individual is alleging unintentional discrimination against a protected class. Adverse impact discrimination refers to policies or practices that are seemingly neutral but disproportionately affect a protected class of people in an unfavorable way.
Unintentional discrimination is also referred to as disparate impact discrimination. The aggrieved party in this case does not claim that the adverse impact was a result of intentional discrimination, but rather a result of policies or practices that have a greater negative effect on a protected class than on other groups.The Civil Rights Act of 1964 made it unlawful for employers to discriminate against applicants or employees based on their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Adverse impact claims can be made under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, color, religion, and national origin. To pursue an adverse impact claim, an individual must be a member of a protected class and provide evidence that the employer's policies or practices had a discriminatory effect on the protected class. This claim can be made even if the employer had no discriminatory intent.
to know about protected class visit:
https://brainly.com/question/30039499
#SPJ11
When a plaintiff in a strict liability lawsuit has used a product in a way that is not intended or that the defendant could not have reasonably foreseen, the defendant may assert which defense?.
Strict liability is the defense you may assert.
In terms of products responsibility, irrespective of the defendant's intention, a defendant is liable if the plaintiff can demonstrate that the product is faulty.
Regardless of the steps taken to avoid harm, a defendant who participated in an unusually risky sport will be held held responsible any evidence of negligence—for any personal injuries and damages to property brought on by the action.
To succeed in an absolute liability action, you must first sustain harm. Second, you need to demonstrate that the harm was brought on by the defendant's goods or behavior. You can sue for your losses without having to prove fault as long as their actions caused your damages and the situation falls within strict liability laws.
To know more about liability lawsuit, visit the link:
https://brainly.com/question/28173731
#SPJ4
Foreign policy is?
A. The way in which the United States shares intelligence with other nations
B. An alliance with foreign countries in order to prevent war
C. A collection of free trade agreements between two nations
D. Strategies and goals that guide a nation's relations with other countries
E. Both B & C
Answer:
D. Strategies and goals that guide a nation's relations with other countries
Ivan met with his friend Anthony, who was driving a flashy new red convertible. Ivan knew that neither Anthony nor his family owned this car, but it looked good, so he got in and let Anthony take him for a ride. Ivan also knew that Anthony used drugs and sometimes took other people's things and sold them to get money to buy cocaine. Anthony offered to sell Ivan an MP3 player he had in the back seat of the car for $40. Ivan agreed to pay him the money.
a. Have any crimes been committed? If so, which crimes and by whom?
b. Why does society make receiving stolen property a crime? Should it be?
c. Would you ever buy something for an extremely low price from a friend? How would you know for sure it was not stolen?
Yes, a crime was committed as Anthony used drugs and sometimes took other people's things and sold them to get money to buy cocaine. This was a crime of theft.
The crime of receiving a stolen property is defined as knowingly receiving the stolen property with the sole intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property stolen. So, receiving of stolen property is a crime.
So, this tends to prevent concealing of a property by a particular person who thus know that such property is thus obtained by an illegal way. Suppose if an item is sold by at a very low price so the item can be stolen. Thus, this is an act of crime which is called theft.
Hence, handling stolen goods is a crime.
To learn more about theft here:
https://brainly.com/question/17224809
#SPJ1
What is required of states that do not have OSHA-approved job safety and health plans? They are required to meet basic workplace safety protocol. They are required to meet basic workplace safety protocol. They are required to have emergency management plans and workplace safety protocol. They are required to have emergency management plans and workplace safety protocol. All states are required to have OSHA-approved job safety and health plans. All states are required to have OSHA-approved job safety and health plans. They are required to meet federal OSH laws and standards
The correct options required of states that do not have OSHA-approved job safety and health plans are A, B and D.
A. They are required to meet basic workplace safety protocol.
B. They are required to have emergency management plans and workplace safety protocol.
D. They are required to meet federal OSH laws and standards.
To stop workers from being murdered or suffering other types of injury at work, the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) was established. Companies are obligated by law to provide safe working conditions for their employees. 29 state plans that have received OSHA approval are now running state-wide health and safety at work initiatives. Regulations and enforcement programs for State Plans must be at least as effective as those for OSHA, while they may have additional or more strict criteria. The correct options are A, B and D.
A safe and healthy workplace free from severe known threats is something that employers are required to offer. This is sometimes referred to as the OSH Act's General Duty Clause. Numerous OSHA regulations specify several ways that companies must educate their staff, including warning signs, color-coding, signals, and training. The correct options are A, B and D.
Learn more about OSHA here:
https://brainly.com/question/13591663
#SPJ4
Evaluate the impact of personal values onthe success of the census campaign
There is a great impact of personal values onthe success of the campaign.
What is the effect of personal values on the census?There is a direct impact of personal values on the success of the census campaign because census can be done only with the help of cooperation. Without cooperature, this activity should not be done efficiently.
So we can conclude that there is a great impact of personal values onthe success of the census campaign.
Learn more about compaign here: https://brainly.com/question/1086036
which two symbolic interaction theories are among the best known in explaining crime and deviance?
There are two symbolic interaction theories that are widely used in explaining crime and deviance. The first one is labeling theory which posits that criminal behavior is not inherently deviant but is labeled as such by the society.
The labels that are attached to a person's behavior or identity can lead to negative self-concept, social stigma, and exclusion. This labeling process can also create a self-fulfilling prophecy where the person conforms to the label and continues to engage in deviant behavior.
The second theory is social learning theory which suggests that people learn to engage in criminal behavior through social interactions and modeling. Criminal behavior is seen as a learned behavior that is acquired through exposure to other criminals, reinforcement of criminal behavior, and exposure to deviant norms. This theory emphasizes the role of socialization and environment in shaping criminal behavior.
Both labeling theory and social learning theory offer important insights into the social construction of crime and deviance. By understanding the role of social interaction, labeling, and social learning in criminal behavior, we can develop more effective strategies to prevent and reduce crime. In conclusion, these two symbolic interaction theories offer a valuable perspective in understanding the complex social dynamics of crime and deviance.
To know more about Deviance visit:
https://brainly.com/question/29360414
#SPJ11
Question 12 of 20
Which constitutional amendment expanded the right to vote?
A. Twenty-Second
B. Twenty-Third
C. Twenty Fifth
D. Twenty-Fourth
SSM
The 23rd amendment granted the District of Columbia the right to vote. The amendment granted access to Electoral votes as if it were a state.
In which of these states is it illegal to fall asleep in a cheese shop, NEW YORK, ILLINOIS, MASSACHUSETTS, PENNSYLVANIA?
Answer:
Illinois is the state where it is illegal to do this.
Among the given options, it is not explicitly illegal to fall asleep in a cheese shop in any of the states: New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, or Pennsylvania.
It's important to note that specific laws and regulations can vary within each state, and there might be local ordinances or specific circumstances where falling asleep in a cheese shop could potentially be considered a violation.
However, as a general statement, there are no known laws in these states that explicitly prohibit falling asleep in a cheese shop. It's always advisable to be respectful of the rules and policies of any establishment and to inquire about any specific guidelines regarding sleeping or resting on the premises.
Learn more about cheese shop here:
https://brainly.com/question/22734191
#SPJ2
In cities, about _____ of every _____ _______ killed by motor vehicle crashes are ___________; in rural areas, the rate is about ______ of every ____.
Discuss the first reason Carter gives for believing the abuse of women and girls is the number one human rights violation.
Answer:
Carter believes that the abuse of women and girls is the most serious human rights violation because religious books, such as the Bible, Old Testament, New Testament, Quran, and other sacred scriptures, have been misconstrued by men in positions of power in synagogues, churches, and mosques. Women are not permitted to serve as priests, pastors, or deacons in the church, or as military chaplains. A woman who is teaching in a classroom is unable to do so if there is a guy there. This is a widespread issue because men have the power to declare that if women aren't equal in God's eyes, why should I regard them as equals myself?
Explanation:
I hope this helps!
Carter believed that the abuse of the female gender which was part of human rights violation was fueled as a result of the misinterpretation of religious scriptures.
What are the religious scriptures?The scriptures includes the holy scriptures in the bible, Old Testament, New Testament, Quran etc.
Because of the misinterpretation of these religious scriptures, the president believed that the abuse of the female gender which was part of human rights violation was fueled as a result.
Read more about religious scriptures
brainly.com/question/14423329
#SPJ6
an advocate of the washington consensus would most likely recommend which of the following for a developing country?
Answer:
Since there is no multiple choice to determine "which of the following" I will try to answer to the best of my knowledge.
An advocate of the Washington Consensus would most likely recommend the following policy prescriptions for a developing country:
Fiscal Discipline
Using sound fiscal policies to promote macroeconomic stability, such as reducing government expenditure and maintaining modest budget deficits.
Tax Reform
Tax reform entails broadening the tax base and minimizing tax inefficiencies in order to increase efficiency and produce income for public investments and social programs.
Trade Liberization
Trade liberalization refers to the process of opening up the economy to international trade by lowering trade obstacles such as tariffs and import quotas in order to stimulate economic growth and integration into the global economy.
Deregulation
Deregulation is the removal of unneeded rules and bureaucratic impediments to business formation, competition, and investment.
Privatization
Privatization refers to the sale of state-owned firms to the private sector in order to increase efficiency and productivity, promote competition, and attract foreign investment.
Market-oriented Exchange Rates
Adoption of market-based exchange rate systems to reflect supply and demand forces and increase export competitiveness.
Investment in Human Capital
Investing in Human Capital entails improving education and healthcare systems in order to generate a skilled workforce and boost overall productivity.
Secure Property Rights
Establishing and implementing laws to safeguard property rights in order to foster investment, entrepreneurship, and economic growth.
Extra Notes
Critics argue that the Washington Consensus' one-size-fits-all approach overlooks developing country conditions, requiring tailored policies and strategies for sustainable development.
Hope this helps! ^^
Jill enters into a contract to buy a certain building from Kim. At the closing, Kim refuses to transfer title. In a suit for breach, Jill should seek specific performance toA. make the terms reasonable and enforce the contract as reformedB. obtain the exact bargain promised in the contractC. return the parties to the positions they occupied before the contractD. reform the contract to reflect the parties' true intentions
Option B is correct. In a suit for breach, Jill should seek specific performance to obtain the exact bargain promised in the contract.
A legally enforceable agreement between two or more parties known as a contract establishes, clarifies, and regulates the parties' respective rights and obligations. A contract usually entails the exchange of products, services, cash, or a promise to exchange any of those things at a later time. The damaged party may seek legal remedies like damages or rescission in the event of a contract breach. The foundation of contract law, which is the area of the law of obligations pertaining to contracts, is the idea that agreements must be upheld.
Like other aspects of private law, contract law differs from country to jurisdiction. Common law jurisdictions, civil law jurisdictions, and mixed law jurisdictions, which incorporate features of both common law and civil law, can be used to categories the various systems of contract law.
Know more about contract here:
https://brainly.com/question/2669219
#SPJ4
If you refuse to take a blood urine breath test to determine if you are under the influence
The Supreme Court has held that the Second
Amendment prohibits the enactment of any kind
of gun control laws.
True
False
1. how would you classify ford legal and moral responsibility and why?legally, was this intentional, reckless, negligent or a combination of the three?
Ford's legal responsibility depends on the specific facts of the case. Generally, Ford would be held liable for any intentional, reckless, or negligent actions taken by its employees or agents.
Intentional actions would involve an employee or agent intentionally acting in a way that causes harm (e.g. selling a defective product). Reckless actions would involve an employee or agent acting in a way that shows a disregard for the safety of others (e.g. selling a product without proper testing). Negligence would involve an employee or agent failing to exercise reasonable care while performing an act that results in harm (e.g. failing to properly inspect a product before selling it).
Ford's moral responsibility is to ensure that its products and services are of the highest quality and safety standards. Ford should take all necessary steps to ensure that its employees and agents act in a manner that prioritizes safety and quality assurance. This includes regularly training and monitoring employees and agents to ensure they are following proper safety protocols and quality standards.
To learn more about legal responsibility link is here
brainly.com/question/4818130
#SPJ4
Define opening statement
Answer:
An opening statement is generally the first occasion that the trier of fact has to hear from a lawyer in a trial, aside possibly from questioning during voir dire. The opening statement is generally constructed to serve as a "road map" for the fact-finder.
Explanation:
the critical concept that emerged in the palko decision is that of ________ rights.
Answer:
Double Jeopardy right
Explanation:
This clause has it that is prohibited for a person to be convicted for the same crime more than once. This is a fifth amendment clause that was developed following the palko v Connecticut case. Palko had being charged for first degree murder but he got second degree sentence. The state of Connecticut filed an appeal against him and won the appeal. He was therefore sentenced to death