Megan Meier killed herself after "Josh Evans" posted harsh criticisms of her on MySpace. It was later discovered that "Josh Evans" was a fictional persona two created by two girls. This was a famous case of _____.

C)A court that does not typically hear original trials, but whose opinions are regularly reviewed by other state courts is likely to be a(n) Intermediate Appellate Court

An intermediate appellate court is a court that does not typically hear original trials but focuses on reviewing the decisions and opinions of lower courts. Its primary function is to review and consider appeals from trial courts or lower appellate courts. The opinions rendered by an intermediate appellate court serve as guidance for other state courts, as they establish precedent and can influence future cases. These courts play a crucial role in the judicial system by ensuring consistency and uniformity in the interpretation and application of the law.

To read more about Intermediate Appellate Court click here

https://brainly.com/question/33718034

#SPJ11

Answer:

Explanation:

National Government is just the government of a single country

Answer:

federal government is the answer

Answer:

Hello There!!

Explanation:

I believe the answer is C. The law of supply and demand does not apply because in a command economy, the government controls the market.

hope this helps,have a great day!!

~Pinky~

Answer:

The statute of frauds is a common law concept that requires written contracts for certain agreements to be binding. The statute applies to land sales and most purchases of goods over $500. There are significant exceptions, such as oral contracts where work has already started.

Explanation:

The U.S. House of Representatives most significant duty is passing laws. In the US, bills are the starting point for all laws. A bill needs to be approved by the President, the U.S. Senate, and the House of Representatives in order to become law.

Steps to make a law-

The bill is drafted, once the bill is written, it needs to be presented. The bill is presented in the House if a Representative is the sponsor. A bill is sent to a committee as soon as it is introduced. Both the House and the Senate have a number of committees made up of groups of members of Congress who have a particular interest in certain subjects, like health or international affairs. Committees are organized into subcommittees, each of which is further specialized in a particular area. The committee will get together to "mark up" the bill after the hearings and subcommittee evaluation are finished. Before sending the bill to the "floor," they alter and amend it. A bill is killed if a committee decides not to report it to the entire chamber of Congress. A bill is referred to the other chamber after being passed by the House or Senate and typically travels the same path through committees before coming to the floor. A bill is sent to the President once it has been approved in identical form by the House and Senate. The bill is signed into law if the president gives his approval.

Know more about "House if a Representative" visit

brainly.com/question/29391300

#SPJ4

True. Any gadget, destructive weapon, or explosion is considered a hoax bomb.

The term "hoax bomb" refers to any device or item that, through its design, construction, content, or characteristics, appears to be, or to contain, or is represented to be, or to contain, a destructive device or explosive as defined in this chapter but, in reality, is an imitation or facsimile that is inoperable or does not contain the destructive device or explosive that was represented to be present.

A felony is committed by anyone who creates, owns, sells, delivers, sends, mails, displays, uses, threatens to use, tries to use, conspires to use, or makes easily accessible to others a hoax bomb without the proper authorization.

To know more about Explosives visit:

https://brainly.com/question/8393707

#SPJ4

If you're NOT moving anywhere for more than a minute, turn off your engine to save fuel. Thus the correct answer is B.

Saving fuel is important as it is the price of fuel is increasing day by day and overconsumption may lead them to deduction in the quantity so they can not be available for future use.

The quality of the air that we inhale is degrading, people are increasingly becoming energy sensitive. Energy conservation will aid economic growth, enhance the environment, and decrease the effects of rising oil costs and our dependency on foreign imports of oil.

Turning off the engine when not moving to any place will help in saving fuel, the turned-on engined creates the wastage of fuel when the vehicle is not in movement.

Therefore, option B Turn off your engine is appropriate.

Learn more about saving fuel, here:

https://brainly.com/question/13256820

#SPJ2

Answer:

yeah because they try to help you think of the consequences later

If the police had no warrant saying they could go in or search Joe's house then the police could be in a certain amount of trouble as well seeing as Joe did not willingly let them in and they never had a warrant but Joe could be in a lot more trouble for being in the possession of drugs.

And smart homes should be more advanced to these kinds of things because they could have been fake cops, plus they had no warrant which leaves everyone in this situation at fault especially Joe for being in the possession of drugs and the possible false 911 call influenced on drugs either making him see things or think things, maybe even both.

Given that the police did not have a search warrant, and Joe did not open the door, those items to be inadmissible as evidence.

As advanced technology becomes more and more common, police might need to develop for interacting with smart homes where police agency of the future may have automated dispatchers answering 9-1-1 calls, autonomous police cars, artificial intelligence (AI) robots on patrol, biometric monitoring for officer health and safety, and smartphone applications to interact with smart city technology software systems to process and file data.

Thus, the admissibility of evidence means any document, testimony, or tangible evidence used in a Court of Law. All evidence is not allowed in the Court, only those evidence which is reliable and relevant are admitted in the Court of Law.

Generally, irrelevant evidence, unfairly prejudicial evidence, character evidence, evidence protected by privilege, and, among others, hearsay evidence is inadmissible.

With the dawn of artificial intelligence (AI), a slew of new machine learning tools promise to help protect us quickly and precisely tracking those who may commit a crime before it happens through data.

To learn more about inadmissible evidence and artificial intelligence (AI) refer

https://brainly.com/question/15713422

#SPJ2

Answer: See explanation

Explanation:

An appellate court which is also referred to as an appeals court is a court of law that is given the power to change the lower court decision.

The things that an appellate judges look for when they review a case include whether there was a legal mistake during the trial court that was made and also whether the judgement given by the judge was based on the fact that there was a mistake made.

Answer:

If the driver's statement was voluntarily obtained by the police without duress, then the statement will be admissible.  But, if otherwise, it cannot be admitted.  Such self-incriminating statements are usually used as evidence for police to arrest a suspect, but to convict.  This is why at the point of arrest, the suspect is read his or her "rights to remain silent."

Explanation:

It is the responsibility of the trial judge to determine any issues as to the statement's voluntariness. This implies that the confession can be admitted into evidence if the judge determines that the confession was voluntarily made by the driver.  The judge will not admit the statement if it is determined that there were some use of threats of force, violence, or intimidation on the part of the police to obtain the self-incriminating confession.

Answer:

Each state is different, at the end of the day, your education district or chancellor decides. For example if you got suspended in elementary school, your record wil be removed by middle school. It’s okay and we all make mistakes, colleges won’t see this unless it’s on permanent record. For example me, when I was in grade school, I got suspended for bringing a butter knife, but at the end of the day if its in elementary or middle school, don’t do anything bad before yiu23====

Answer:

C is the answer

Explanation:

Both supported a strong central government is the Democratic Party similar in beliefs to the Federalists. The correct option is C.

The Federalist party consisted primarily of wealthy businessmen, large landowners in the North, and conservative small farmers and entrepreneurs. Geographically speaking, they were mainly in New England, with a significant portion in the Middle Atlantic states.

While the modern Republican party and the Anti-Federalists share a firm conviction as defenders of individual state rights, the modern Democratic party and the Federalists share a belief in a strong central government.

There were many parallels between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Both favored this young nation and understood that it required a government. Both favored giving Congress the authority to declare war and draft treaties.

Thus, the ideal selection is option C.

Learn more about Federalists here:

https://brainly.com/question/29496480

#SPJ6

A criminal case involving the illegal acquisition of guns in Mexico and their sale to someone in California would typically be handled by a federal court, specifically the United States District Court for the district where the crime occurred.

The reason for this is that the crime falls under federal jurisdiction because it entails breaking both state and federal laws as well as crossing international and interstate borders.

Federal offences, such as the unlawful importation or exportation of firearms, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal court system, as do other federal offences.

As a result, the matter would be heard and decided by a federal court.

For such more question on criminal:

https://brainly.com/question/740707

#SPJ11

This agent most likely engaged in Blockbusting.

Blockbusting is the practice of placing African American residents in historically all-white communities in an effort to precipitate a quick exodus of white people and a decrease in house prices. This method has long been employed by real estate speculators to take advantage of market instability brought on by prejudice.

The most frequent instances of blockbusting encompass: When real estate brokers inform neighborhood residents that their community is "changing" and that they need to take their property; Making house-to-house calls to neighborhood residents to urge them to sell before their property prices decline; and.

To know more about Blockbusting visit:

https://brainly.com/question/17063288

#SPJ4

The law that provides protection for workers who are self-employed or move from one job to another is the Employment Rights Act.

The Employment Rights Act offers certain protections to workers, regardless of their employment status. These protections include the right to receive a written statement of employment terms, protection against unfair dismissal, entitlement to statutory notice periods, the right to request flexible working arrangements, and protection against unlawful deductions from wages. Additionally, the act provides provisions for handling disputes and grievances in the workplace.

For self-employed individuals, the act may provide some limited protections, such as protection against discrimination and protection for whistleblowers. However, it's important to note that self-employed individuals typically have different legal rights and obligations compared to employees, as they are responsible for managing their own businesses and do not have the same level of employment rights and benefits.

Visit here to learn more about Employment Rights:

brainly.com/question/29571857

#SPJ11

Boatright’s analysis of the stakeholder theory depicts a positive evaluation of the theory, however, there are certain elements of the theory that he considers flawed.

This paper will examine the strengths and weaknesses of Boatright's analysis of the stakeholder theory and why it cannot be fully accepted.

According to Boatright, the stakeholder theory has been effective in business practices, although, it has not been taken seriously in theory. He argues that the theory is not just about corporate social responsibility but also about the management of corporations and the appropriate actions that should be taken to manage corporations and the stakeholders involved. He acknowledges that the stakeholder theory could still be improved by giving more clarity on its key concepts and how it should be incorporated into practice.

Boatright's strongest argument against his claim that all stakeholders are best served when managers focus on profit for shareholders is the impact of social capital. Social capital argues that companies need to be responsive to their surrounding communities to gain trust and better relationships with customers and stakeholders. In this view, profitability is not always the main goal. Social capital helps companies to gain social resources like trust, confidence, and loyalty. Hence, Boatright fails to acknowledge the impact of social capital, which is vital to building long-term sustainability and a positive reputation for companies.

Read more about stakeholder's theory here:

https://brainly.com/question/32536678

#SPJ11

You have the right to voice your opinion about matters you believe are important. In turn, you have the responsibility to: 3 respect the opinions of others.

An opinion simply refers to a sentence or statement that is typically expressed by a person as a conjecture or thoughts on a subject matter, in a bid to prove, or support an argument.

Civil rights simply means the basic, fundamental rights and freedoms that all living organisms are entitled to, especially human beings that are living around the world.

Generally speaking, it is the responsibility of everyone to respect the opinions of others, even though we all have the right to voice our opinion on a subject matter.

Read more on civil rights here: https://brainly.com/question/13764349

#SPJ1

Answer: respect the opinions of others

Explanation: did this on odyssey-ware

Specialized courts are primarily focused on a single jurisdiction and perform every essential regarding that particular topic.

Specialty courts are particular courts that concentrate primarily on a single jurisdiction. This court manages all matters pertaining to a specific jurisdiction. The judges in this court are specialists or experts in the legal discipline. They exclusively take on civil and criminal cases within a certain region.

Drug courts are specialized court docket programs that cater to people with alcohol and other drug dependency issues who are adults who have been charged with or convicted of a crime, young people who are involved in the juvenile justice system, and parents who have open cases involving child welfare.

Participants in drug court who successfully complete the course of treatment may have their original criminal charges dropped or expunged. The traditional justice system is used to handle a participant's case if they don't finish the program.

To know more about specialized courts, refer:

https://brainly.com/question/16443325

#SPJ4

Complete question is:

Specialized courts (such as drug courts) are popping up all over the country. What is your assessment of this trend? Why do you feel this way?

The difference between arbitration and mediation lies in their approaches to resolving disputes. Arbitration involves a neutral third party making a binding decision, while mediation involves a neutral third party facilitating communication and negotiation between the parties without imposing a decision.

In contracts, management rights refer to the authority of employers to make decisions regarding operations, whereas union rights pertain to the rights granted to employees through collective bargaining. Grievance procedures are formal processes for resolving disputes between employers and employees. Compensation and benefits involve the financial aspects of the employment relationship, while performance appraisal assesses employee performance. The similarities in these contract provisions lie in their focus on the rights, processes, and evaluation within the employment relationship, while the differences are in their specific areas of concern and the parties involved.

Arbitration is a dispute resolution process where an impartial third party, the arbitrator, hears the arguments and evidence presented by both sides and makes a binding decision. This decision is enforceable by law. On the other hand, mediation is a voluntary process in which a neutral third party, the mediator, helps facilitate communication and negotiation between the parties to reach a mutually acceptable resolution. The mediator does not impose a decision and the outcome is determined by the parties themselves.

In employment contracts, management rights typically refer to the authority of employers to make decisions regarding the operation of the business, such as hiring, firing, and setting work policies. Union rights, on the other hand, are the rights and protections granted to employees through collective bargaining, such as the right to organize, bargain collectively, and engage in protected activities. Grievance procedures provide a structured process for employees and employers to address and resolve disputes or complaints. Compensation and benefits pertain to the financial aspects of the employment relationship, including wages, bonuses, and other forms of remuneration, as well as the benefits provided to employees such as healthcare, retirement plans, and leave policies. Performance appraisal is the evaluation of an employee's job performance and can be used for feedback, promotions, or determining compensation.

The similarities among these contract provisions lie in their focus on establishing rights, processes, and evaluation within the employment relationship. They aim to provide clarity, fairness, and accountability in the workplace. However, the differences arise from their specific areas of concern and the parties involved. Management rights primarily focus on the authority of employers, while union rights aim to protect and advance employee rights. Grievance procedures provide a mechanism for resolving conflicts between employers and employees. Compensation and benefits address the financial aspects of employment, and performance appraisal evaluates employee job performance.

Learn more about Compensation

https://brainly.com/question/28250225

#SPJ11

Answer:The law is important as it serves as a guide about what is agreed in society. Without it, there will be tension between social classes and cultures. We must pursue them. The legislation makes it possible to accept improvements that exist in society.

The first policy that impacts Indigenous peoples is the Doctrine of Discovery.

The Doctrine of Discovery was the first policy that impacted Indigenous peoples. The Doctrine of Discovery, which emerged in the fifteenth century, provided a legal foundation for European claims to land in the Americas, Africa, and Australia. Indigenous peoples' rights to land, resources, and self-determination were disregarded by this colonial system, which was based on the belief that Indigenous peoples were subhuman and incapable of governing themselves. As a result, Indigenous peoples were frequently exploited, enslaved, and subjected to cultural genocide.

To know more about genocide visit:

brainly.com/question/32013150

#SPJ11

In the case of Gilroy v. Conway, 391 N.W.2d 419, 1986 Mich. App. Lexis 2633 (Court of Appeals of Michigan, 1986), Conway did not act ethically.

The following reasons can be used to back up the assertion:
Firstly, Conway did not provide Gilroy with a good reason for terminating his contract without cause. Even though the contract had an 'at will' provision, which gave Conway the authority to end the agreement without cause, the contract also required the parties to act ethically and in good faith. This means that Conway should have given Gilroy a justifiable reason for ending the contract.Secondly, Conway made an ambiguous statement that misled Gilroy into believing that his services were still required. When Gilroy requested a definite answer about the project's duration, Conway did not provide one. Instead, he provided an ambiguous response that led Gilroy to believe that his services were still needed.Thirdly, the court stated that the case was not fair and equitable. This was because Conway's defense relied on inadmissible hearsay evidence that was prejudicial. According to the court, the hearsay evidence lacked foundation, and there was no opportunity to cross-examine the declarant. In conclusion, Conway did not act ethically in this case. The court's opinion was correct since Conway violated the terms of the contract by not providing Gilroy with a justifiable reason for terminating his contract without cause. The outcome was not fair and equitable since Conway's defense relied on inadmissible hearsay evidence that was prejudicial. The court should have taken into consideration the ethical requirements of the contract, which Conway breached by terminating the agreement without cause and misleading Gilroy about the project's duration.

To Know More about consideration visit:

brainly.com/question/33159085

#SPJ11

Explanation:

ewan ko basta ang alam ko wala kang jowa

Documents filed by non-litigants that contain information and arguments for the judges or justices to consider are called amicus curiae briefs.

The term "amicus curiae" translates to "friend of the court" in Latin. These briefs are filed by individuals, organizations, or entities that are not directly involved in the case but have an interest in its outcome or possess relevant expertise or perspective. Amicus briefs provide additional information, legal analysis, and policy arguments to assist the court in reaching a well-informed decision.

Amicus curiae briefs serve several important purposes. First, they offer a broader range of viewpoints and arguments, providing the court with a more comprehensive understanding of the legal issues at hand. These briefs often present unique legal arguments or present alternative interpretations of existing law, enriching the court's analysis.

Second, amicus briefs bring attention to the broader implications of a case. They highlight potential societal or industry impacts, policy considerations, or constitutional concerns that may extend beyond the immediate parties involved. This information assists the court in considering the potential consequences of its decision and shaping the law accordingly.

Furthermore, amicus briefs allow non-litigants to contribute their expertise or perspective on complex legal matters. These briefs are often submitted by advocacy groups, professional associations, academic institutions, or other entities with specialized knowledge or experience in a particular field.

know more about amicus curiae briefs here:

https://brainly.com/question/31764627

#SPJ11

The correct option is not e. The New Deal was a series of programs and reforms enacted by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression, aimed at providing relief and stimulating economic recovery. It did not rewrite the role of government to vastly increase its size and role in private commercial activity.

Out of the given options, the correct option is: e. Was a legislative package that rewrote the role of government, vastly increasing its size and its role in private commercial activity.The New Deal was a legislative package that rewrote the role of government, vastly increasing its size and its role in private commercial activity.The New Deal was a series of programs, public work projects, financial reforms, and regulations enacted by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the United States between 1933 and 1939. It was a response to the Great Depression, and its programs sought to provide immediate relief to citizens as well as an overhaul of the financial system. The New Deal established a number of welfare state programs and protective regulations, with the goal of providing relief to the unemployed and stimulating economic recovery. The New Deal did not alter the makeup of the Supreme Court, nor was it President Richard Nixon's action plan to alter the relationship between the people and their government.

learn more about Roosevelt here;

https://brainly.com/question/1182184?

#SPJ11

Answer:

Explanation:

Failing to acknowledge unity in diversity can have several negative impacts on individuals, communities, and societies:

Divisions and Conflict: Ignoring or neglecting the value of unity in diversity can lead to divisions and conflicts within society. When differences are not acknowledged and respected, it can result in prejudice, discrimination, and social tension. This can create an environment of hostility and hinder social cohesion.

Marginalization and Exclusion: Without recognizing and embracing diversity, certain groups or individuals may be marginalized or excluded. This can lead to unequal access to opportunities, resources, and rights. Marginalized groups may face discrimination, stigmatization, and limited participation in social, economic, and political spheres.

Lack of Representation and Voice: Failing to acknowledge unity in diversity can result in the underrepresentation of certain groups in decision-making processes and institutions. This lack of representation can lead to a distortion of perspectives and interests, excluding diverse voices from shaping policies and initiatives that affect them.

Missed Opportunities for Innovation and Growth: Diversity brings different perspectives, experiences, and ideas to the table. When unity in diversity is not recognized, these valuable contributions may be overlooked or dismissed. This can limit the potential for innovation, creativity, and problem-solving. Embracing diversity, on the other hand, can foster innovation and lead to broader perspectives in various fields.

Social Injustice and Inequality: Failing to acknowledge unity in diversity can perpetuate social injustice and inequality. It can reinforce existing power structures and systems that disadvantage certain groups based on their identity. This can hinder social progress, hinder equal opportunities, and contribute to persistent disparities in education, employment, healthcare, and other domains.

Cultural Erosion and Loss: Neglecting diversity can result in the erosion and loss of cultural traditions, practices, and knowledge. Cultural diversity enriches societies by providing a variety of cultural expressions, languages, and perspectives. When unity in diversity is not acknowledged, cultural homogenization may occur, leading to the loss of cultural heritage and identity.

Overall, failing to acknowledge unity in diversity can lead to divisions, inequalities, and missed opportunities. Recognizing and embracing diversity is essential for fostering inclusive and harmonious societies that value and respect the contributions and rights of all individuals and groups.

PLS MARK ME BRAINLIEST

Answer:

This can give rise to various social tensions between different states and people of linguistic origin. It causes corruption and illiteracy in many areas of the country. Due to underdeveloped infrastructure, power shortage, roads etc.

Answer:

ARAT PO ML HAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAH

Explanation:

BUHATIN KITA HAHAHAHAHAH