Answer:
It is FALSE that State employment laws cannot forbid discrimination based on sexual orientation because discrimination based on sexual orientation is not expressly forbidden under federal civil rights law.
Explanation:
Employment law ;is the area of law that governs the employer-employee relationship.This area is made up of both state and federal laws and includes many different subjects with the common goal to protect workers' rights. For employees, these laws work to: Prevent discrimination. Promote health and safety.
Federal Civil Rights Laws; Protect Equal Access.They prohibit discrimination based on race, color, and national origin.
PLEASE NEED HELP ANYONE IN LAW THAT CAN HELP ME WITHT THIS 2 QUESTIONS ? !!!!!
1. A client is charged with driving under the influence. He claims that he had only one beer. He registers a 1.0 on the breathalyzer. Your supervising attorney wants you to research the case and see if the client can be convicted of DUI.
To find the latest cases on this subject, Researcher A says you should check the pocket parts to the digests. Researcher B says you should check the advance sheets. Which researcher is correct?
A. Researcher A is correct.
B. Neither researcher is correct.
C. Both researchers are correct.
2. A client is charged with driving under the influence. He claims that he had only one beer. He registers a 1.0 on the breathalyzer. Your supervising attorney wants you to research the case and see if the client can be convicted of DUI.
Bob is looking for helpful material for this case and has already looked at cases, statutes, and administrative regulations. Which of the following would be least helpful to Bob in finding materials for this case?
A. Treatises
B. Practice guides
C. Out-of-state cases
Answer:
1.c
Explanation:
so they can check what hes done
Long-arm statutes: a. give state courts automatic jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants. b. have been ruled unconstitutional. c. are simply procedural statutes that still require "minimum contacts" for use. d. none of the above
Answer:
a. give state courts automatic jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants.Explanation:
Long-arm statutes are laws that allow state courts to acquire automatic jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants. The courts can apprehend an out-of-state defendant based on certain actions which have connections with the concerned state.The provisions of a long-arm statute normally grants a state court the right to jurisdiction over a non-state domicile if the individual has minimum connection within the state's court jurisdiction.8. The express powers of a corporation come from which three sources? a. U.S. and state constitutions. b. State laws. c. The Revised Model Business Corporations Act. d. The Uniform Commercial Code. e. The articles of incorporation. f. The bylaws.
The express powers of a corporation come from (f) the by laws
What does the express power corporation mean?
The explicit powers of a corporation are set out in the Articles of Incorporation, the Corporation Establishment Act, the State and the Federal Constitution.
Company director or trustee. Qualification and duration. – Unless otherwise provided in this Code, the Board of Directors or its trustees shall exercise the authority of the Company, conduct all businesses and control all assets of the Company.
Learn more about Corporation at
https://brainly.com/question/13551671
#SPJ2
____ 1. The first law of thermodynamics states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. For living organisms, which of the following is an important consequence of the first law? a. The energy content of an organism is constant. b. The organism ultimately must obtain all of the necessary energy for life from its environment. c. The entropy of an organism decreases with time as the organism grows in complexity. d. Organisms are unable to transform energy.
Answer:
The consequences of the first law of thermodynamics is a. The energy content of an organism is constant.
Explanation:
The first law of thermodynamics states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. However, energy can change forms, and energy can flow from one place to another. A particular consequence of the law of conservation of energy is that the total energy of an isolated system does not change.
The first law of thermodynamics implies that living organisms must obtain all the necessary energy for life from their surroundings. They do this by consuming food, which provides the energy needed for processes like growth and reproduction.
The correct answer is b. The organism ultimately must obtain all of the necessary energy for life from its environment. The first law of thermodynamics, also known as the Law of Energy Conservation, implies that energy is conserved in an isolated system, which means it is neither created nor destroyed. For a living organism, this law is especially important because it dictates that the organism must obtain the energy it needs to sustain life from its environment. The organism does this by consuming food, which provides the energy it requires for processes like growth and reproduction. In this sense, organisms are transforming energy from one form into another, but they are not creating or destroying it.
https://brainly.com/question/9614649
#SPJ11
This granted tribes unsettled western prairie land in exchange for their territories within state borders
Answer:Indian removal act
Explanation:
The Indian removal act was signed into law by the former president of the United States of America known as President Andrew Jackson on the 28th of May, 1830 it involved a negotiated arrangements between the Government and the native Americans who recide in the Southern parts of the United States of America to relocate to a federal territory west of the Mississippi River in exchange for white settlements.
Ray was driving to UHD on his way to class and he was late as usual. On the way to school, Ray saw his neighbor whom he strongly disliked, trip and fall over a flower pot. Ray let his window down, told his neighbor he should be more careful, and sped past the neighbor. The neighbor laid there for hours and sustained serious injuries that could have been prevented if someone had called the ambulance for him. If the neighbor sues Ray for negligence, will he prevail?
Answer:
If the neighbor sues Ray for negligence he won't prevail because that was an act of crime. If he say the trip and fall over he might have been killed by the injuries. Ray will be sentenced to at least a couple months in prison.
This article of the constitution deals with the executive branch
Explanation:
The Executive Branch. Article II of the Constitution establishes the Executive branch of the federal government. It defines the office of President and Vice President, and an Electoral College to elect them.
A law was recently passed in the city of Birmingdon that specifies a long list of restrictions on disposing of different kinds of waste material. The law is long, meticulous, and complicated, and many citizens do not understand all the points of the law or the purpose it is meant to fulfill. Citizens are commonly caught breaking the ordinance. Which law or principle of law which is most relevant to this situation
Answer:
Substantive Due Process
Explanation:
According to a different source, these are the options that come with this question:
a. Procedural Due Process
b. Substantive Due Process
c. First Amendment
d. Equal Protection Laws
Substantive due process refers to a principle of law that allows courts to protect certain rights from government interference. This means that courts see a difference between acts that should be held to government regulation and those that should be protected from government interference. Substantive due process is intended to protect individuals against majoritarian polices that exceed the limits of governmental authority.
Property rights have been determined to be a major factor that helps countries sustain economic growth. Governments can change laws and policies in order to give individuals and firms more freedom. By doing​ so
Answer:
the government gives entrepreneurs the right to purchase capital i.e.,land which can be used to sustain economic growth.Explanation:
If governments can relax property rights and change the laws and policies of property rights in order to give individuals and firms more freedom, it will have a great impact in the economic growth of the country.
This is because if individuals or firms can purchase capital such as land, it will induce the entrepreneurs to take more risks to create new products, ideas, and more technology. Land can be used as an asset to mortgage or to avail loans to enhance productivity of the firms.
Property and contractual rights are essential for economic growth, serving as the foundation for secure transactions and business activities. Governments can foster a conducive legal environment for these rights, thereby enabling economic activities and investments. Additionally, investments in human capital, infrastructure, and innovation further stimulate economic growth.
Property rights and contractual rights are fundamental to economic growth. These are the rights allowing individuals and firms to own and use property as they see fit, including the ability to enter into contracts with others concerning the use of their property. Having a legal environment that upholds these rights enables societal trust in the security of transactions, which is crucial for doing business and, consequently, stimulates economic activities and growth. Governments can enhance economic growth by modifying laws and policies to ensure that property rights are clear, public, fair, enforced, and equally applicable to all members of society.
For economies to grow, output and incomes must increase, which requires a setting where individuals feel confident to invest, innovate, and engage in commerce. This confidence stems from the assurance that their property and contractual rights are protected by law. Without such a legal framework, the risk of non-payment and the inability to enforce agreements would deter people from doing business, thereby slowing down economic growth
If you were to embezzle money from your employer, you likely would face two separate and distinct lawsuits as a consequence of your embezzlement: a criminal lawsuit and a civil lawsuit. Why do we have separate lawsuits for torts (civil) and crimes (criminal) that arise from a single occurrence? What are the differences between these two types of lawsuits?
Crimes are offences against the state, and are prosecuted by the state. Civil cases on the other hand, typically involve disputes between individuals regarding the legal duties and responsibilities they owe to one another.These cases are adjudicated by the civil lawsuits. Civil cases usually involve private disputes between persons or organizations. Criminal cases involve an action that is considered to be harmful to society as a whole.
There are separate lawsuits for crimes and torts because the punishments for crimes and torts differ and should be judged accordingly.
The differences between criminal and civil lawsuits are:
Crimes are against the state and are prosecuted by the state while torts are against individuals and are prosecuted by the wronged individualCivil cases in most times only require monetary punishments in form of fine while criminal cases involve both jail term and monetary punishmentCriminal cases requires a higher standard of proof than civil casesDefendants in a civil case don't have the rights to an attorney, but the defendants in criminal cases doThe 15th amendment to the constitution was passed about five years after the end of the civil war. What did it say?
The 15th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1870, was a significant post-Civil War legislative action that sought to ensure voting rights for African Americans.
It declared that "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." This amendment came as a direct response to the challenges faced by African Americans following the Civil War, particularly with the advent of the Black Codes designed to maintain an unequal social structure.
As the last of the three Reconstruction amendments, the 15th Amendment was crucial for former slaves and their descendants, securing a measure of political freedom that had been long denied. However, it's important to note that despite this amendment, many African Americans continued to face significant barriers in exercising their right to vote, particularly in the Southern states, where tactics such as literacy tests and poll taxes were employed to suppress the African American vote.
Professor Smith announces to his dean that the students in his noon class are the worst students that he has ever had and that they should never have been admitted to the school. The students are actually as qualified as any other students admitted to the school. The students may sue Professor Smith for slander.a. trueb. false
Answer:
False
Explanation:
The crime or action of make false spoken statement that can be damaging to a persons reputation is called slander. While written defamation is called libel. Defamation is a tort not a crime. If you have defamed a person he/ she can sue you for damages.
Although the professor is telling the student that they're the worst students and should not have been admitted to school, he is not defaming them he is just angry at them. It often happens in the school that a teacher gets angry of the student and starts yelling at them.
Answer:
a. true.Explanation:
Slander used as a defamation is an unreasonable act of making defamatory remarks or statements orally against another person or a group of individuals.
In such cases, the plaintiff may sue the person for defamation in a civil court. A defamation is a false or negative statement made by a person to cause shame or damage to the character of another person.
Here, Professor Smith announcement to his dean that the students in his noon class are the worst students is a false statement made against the students as the students are actually as qualified as any other students admitted to the school.
This statement has been made in order to damage the image of the students. Therefore, the students can sue Professor Smith for slander.
In which cases did the supreme court first claim the right of judicial review?
Answer:
Marbury v. Madison
Explanation:
This a case that prompted the establishment of judicial review.
Judicial review explains the power of the federal court in deciding or declaring the act or decision of the government i.e the legislative and executive unconstitutional.
This was first made known during the court judgement on Marbury v. Madison case.
This case took place in 1803, where William Marbury sued then the new secretary of state, James Madison in order to obtain his commission, and the judgement was pronounced on February 24, 1803 precisely, which did not favor Marbury, based on the use of judicial review.
The Federal Privacy Act: a. prohibits release of information (by public agencies) on individuals. b. does not cover medical records. c. provides a disclosure exemption for law enforcement purposes. d. does not apply to all agencies.
Answer:
A
Explanation:
In Export Co. v. Imports, Inc., there is not precedent on which the court can base a decision. The court can consider, among other things, Group of answer choices public policy only. public policy or social values. neither public policy nor social values. social values only.
Answer:
public policy or social values.Explanation:
Public policies are laws, regulations, governmental programs, etc. that helps a government run smoothly and efficiently. Similarly, social values are norms which are derived from distinguished desires and beliefs of a society.
In Export Co. v. Imports, Inc., there is not precedent on which the court can base a decision. The court can consider, among other things, public policy or social values to derive its decision.
This is done because when there are no precedents to be referred at, the most efficient measure that the court can take is by considering the social norms and other public policies which may help in concluding a meaningful decision.
Answer:
b
Explanation:
Assuming that everything else is equal, a bond issued by the government of Japan most likely pays a lower ______ interest rate than a bond issued by a government that is engaged in a civil war.
Assuming that everything else is equal, a bond issued by a government that is engaged in a civil war most likely pays a Lower Interest Rate than a bond issued by the government of Japan.
Explanation:
An interest rate is the amount of or the percentage of principal charged by the lender for the usage of his money.
The principal is the amount of money loaned by the lender or a bank . Since banks borrow money from you (in the form of deposits), they also pay you an interest rate on your money.
Assuming that everything else is equal, a bond issued by a government that is engaged in a civil war most likely pays a Lower Interest Rate than a bond issued by the government of Japan.
This amendment protects all americans from the potential abuses of the legal system and guarantees the due process of law.
Answer: 14th Amendment
Explanation:
The Due process clause of the 14th amendment states “that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”
The Fourteenth Amendment protects all Americans from the potential abuses of the legal system and guarantees the "due process of law.".
What is amendment?An amendment is a change or modification or an addition to the terms of a contract, law, government regulatory filing, or other documents. An amendment in the constitution of a country is known as constitutional amendment.
There is proper procedure is followed in the legislature and by proper voting and passing of the bills the amendments are made in the constitution or in any laws of the government.
With the time the changes occur in the society and to progress with the time it becomes important for the legislature to amend the laws and the constitution. Like the Fourteenth Amendment was made protects all Americans from the potential abuses of the legal system and guarantees the "due process of law.".
Learn more about the amendment here:
https://brainly.com/question/29372567
#SPJ5
What purpose does a grand jury or preliminary hearing serve in adjudicating felony offenses? Should one of these methods be abandoned? If so, which one?
When a felony case arises, an arrest or a criminal complaint is not enough to require the defendant to stand for trial. Before the defendant is required to do so, the court must conduct either a preliminary hearing or a grand jury.
A preliminary hearing occurs when a judge hears the evidence and decides whether there is sufficient evidence to require the defendant to stand trial. Otherwise, the judge must dismiss the charges. An alternative to this is the use of a grand jury. In these cases, the prosecutor presents evidence to a jury made up of members of the public, who then decide whether there is probable cause. I believe that a preliminary hearing is important and should be kept, but that a grand jury is not an institution that needs to be protected. In a grand jury, the jury is not knowledgeable of the law, and no judge is present, which makes its ruling more unreliable.
The purpose of a grand jury or preliminary hearing in the adjudication of felony offenses is to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and that the individual accused of the crime is the one who committed it. This serves as a check on the power of the prosecution and helps to ensure that individuals are not unjustly subjected to a full trial without sufficient evidence.
A grand jury is a group of citizens who review evidence presented by the prosecution in secret proceedings to decide whether to indict a suspect and proceed to trial. The grand jury process is generally used in federal courts and in some states within the United States. It provides a layer of civilian oversight and can serve to protect citizens from unfounded prosecution.
A preliminary hearing, on the other hand, is a judicial proceeding where a judge determines whether there is probable cause to believe that a felony has been committed and that the defendant committed it. This hearing is less formal than a trial and typically occurs shortly after an individual is charged. It allows the defense to cross-examine witnesses and challenge the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Whether one of these methods should be abandoned is a matter of legal debate. Proponents of the grand jury system argue that it allows for civilian participation in the justice system and can act as a buffer between the government and the accused. Critics argue that grand juries are too secretive and that the lack of transparency can lead to a lack of accountability. They also point out that grand juries rarely decline to indict, which may not serve as an effective check on prosecutorial power.
Preliminary hearings, while more transparent, can be seen as duplicative when a grand jury has already determined probable cause. However, they provide an early opportunity for the defense to confront witnesses and gather information, which can be crucial for preparing a defense.
Given the unique benefits and drawbacks of each system, it is not straightforward to argue that one should be abandoned entirely. Instead, reforms could be considered to address the concerns associated with each method. For example, some jurisdictions have moved away from grand juries in favor of preliminary hearings, while others have implemented reforms to make grand jury proceedings more transparent and to provide defendants with greater rights.
In conclusion, both grand juries and preliminary hearings serve important functions in the adjudication of felony offenses. Rather than abandoning one method entirely, it may be more beneficial to consider reforms that enhance the fairness, transparency, and effectiveness of each process.
What most accurately captures a criticism about the requirement to take bar examinations in order to become a licensed lawyer? a. Bar exams "cost too much and exact great liabilities" b. Bar exams "psychologically tax the spirit" while "taxing the bar regulators that grade them" c. Bar exams require "extensive preparation without extensive knowledge" d. Bar exams "test too much and too little"
Answer: The best criticizism is that Bar exams "cost too much and exact great liabilities" Option A is the most correct option
Explanation: Bar exams are used to regulate the number of people that are practical layers. This exam is taken after you've successfully graduated from a law school.
The exam has been designed to favor only the rich, as the poor finds it very difficult to pay the fees involved. The law school is very costly, as the books and course handout are always costly. The exam is too costly that you need a loan that should not be less that $140,000 to complete your studies, leading to big liability to pay off, when you have started practicing. Even when you have passed the exams, you are still meant to pay for your license.
The government should try and subsidize the amount of money been paid for Bar exam, as this will help to increase the boundaries of licensing outstanding layers, thereby creating an equal opportunity chance for the rich and the poor to practice law.
Answer:
c. Bar exams require "extensive preparation without extensive knowledge"
Explanation:
Finishing law school is not enough for someone to become a lawyer. This is because after graduation, you must pass the BAR exam to be considered a lawyer.
However, this exam is very difficult and requires great preparation from your candidates. The biggest problem with this is that the exam requires a lot of preparation, but little knowledge, since candidates end up getting too attached to concepts and guidelines, decorating them often, and not knowing how to apply them in practice.
This ends up generating professionals with little "cleverness" to solve the cases that are involved, as they are attached to decorated concepts that are not always applicable in the real world.
Which of the following is not an exempt security under the 1933 Act? a. municipal bonds b. insurance policies c. promissory notes d. annuities e. All of the above are exempt securities.
Answer:
promissory notes
Explanation:
The Securities Act of 1933 provide full and fair information on the nature of securities sold through interstate and foreign exchange, and to prevent misrepresentations, prohibit deceit, fraud in selling them. This information didn't helps the government but investors to make informed decisions about whether to buy securities from a firm. Investors who incur damages have valuable rights of compensation if they can claim that critical information was reported incompletely.
Under the Securities Act of 1933, promissory notes are generally not exempt securities, unlike municipal bonds, insurance policies, and annuities which are typically exempt. C is correct.
The security that is not exempt under the Securities Act of 1933 is promissory notes (c). The Act exempts certain securities from its registration requirements, and among the listed options, municipal bonds (a), insurance policies (b), and annuities (d) are typically considered exempt securities. However, most promissory notes are not exempt, especially if they are offered to the public and have a typical maturity of more than nine months. Therefore, the answer to the question is option c, promissory notes.
Municipal bonds are exempt because they are government securities, and insurance policies and annuities are generally considered contracts rather than securities. It's important to note that certain short-term notes might be exempt, but in general, promissory notes do not fall under the exempt category.
Merck pleaded guilty to a criminal charge of selling Vioxx and agreed to pay $950 million to the Department of Justice. Select one: a. Tony West, assistant attorney general b. Vioxx c. the Department of Justice. d. Senator Charles Grassley
Answer:
C. Department of Justice
Explanation:
He paid to the department of Justice
In 1932 franklin d. Roosevelt and herbert hoover disagreed most strongly about the desirability of
Options:
A: A balanced federal budget
B. Farm price support
C. Federal aide to Corporations
D. A program of public works
E. Federal relief to Individuals
Answer: E: Federal relief to Individuals
Explanation: Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the thirty-second president of the United States of America,he is a famous politician, who served as a Governor between 1929 to 1933,his performance as Governor where he worked to help the United States come out the Economic hardships of that time helped him to win the Presidential election,he defeated Herbert Hoover in a landslide.
FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT AND HERBERT HOOVER DISAGREED MOST STRONGLY ABOUT THE DESIRABILITY of FEDERAL RELIEF TO INDIVIDUALS.
A. a balanced federal budget
B. farm price supports
C. federal aid to corporations
D. a program of public works
E. federal relief to individuals.
Learn more:
https://brainly.com/question/7214781
The law of ______ was developed in response to the notion that every person has a responsibilty to look after his own safety, and should not be able to place the blame on someone else.
Answer:
The law of health and safety
Explanation:
The law of health and safety at work was passed into law via the health and safety act of 1974. this act ensures that every employer of labor whether self employed or not is responsible for ensuring the safety of its workers by providing them with all the necessary information on how to work safely at work places.
The act also provides room for a person to take responsibility for his own safety and not blame anybody when he or she fails to take the necessary safety precautions been provided by the employer while performing their duties.
What is an example of an exculpatory clause?
A plaintiff sues in negligence but has no direct proof that the defendant behaved unreasonably. What is most likely to help the plaintiff?
Answer:
Res ipsa loquitur
Explanation:
Res Ipsa Loquitur, which loosely means that the facts speak for themselves, is a rule of proof that enables injured parties to avoid the typical proof of negligence in their claim to recuperate damages from the responsible parties. The general law initially stated that the accident has to satisfy the essential basics of negligence: duty, causation, breach of duty, and injury.
Instead of compiling an intricate case indicating that the defendant commits a breach in duty of care that has proximately caused damages or injury, the plaintiff only needs to show that:
• The petitioner suffered damages or incurred injuries under conditions that normally does not occur without negligence.
• The defendant was completely in control of the place where the accident occured or the thing that caused it to happen (the instrumentality, in legalese).
• The plaintiff’s own careless actions does not in any way influence the accident.
Which type of injury prevention begins after an injury and is done to limit the damage caused by the injury?
Answer:
Tertiary.
Explanation:
In medicine, prevention can be primary, secondary or tertiary.
Tertiary prevention refers to type of prevention that takes place ones the individual has an illness or has been injured and its goal is to soften the impact of the illness or injury that he/she suffered.
Tertiary prevention involves action to prevent sequels, to act so that the illness or injury doesn't get worse and to reduce complications.
Therefore, the type of injury prevention that begins after an injury is done to limit the damage caused by it is the tertiary.
Secondary prevention involves interventions after an injury to limit damage caused, focusing on minimizing impact.
Secondary prevention is the type of injury prevention that begins after an injury and is done to limit the damage caused by the injury. This involves interventions to prevent the progression of the injury and minimize its impact on the individual's health and well-being.
Ronella Rump shoots her boyfriend Herbert Hickup with a.22 pistol after she loses her temper in an argument. It is a minor wound, but Herbert is taken to the hospital to have the bullet removed. The hospital is crowded and Herbert is left on a gurney in the cold hallway of the hospital. He dies from shock. Ronella is guilty of unlawful homicide.
Answer:yes
Explanation:
Which one of the following is TRUE?
A.The creation or existence of a compensation agreement does not establish an agency relationship between the giver of compensation and the recipient.
B.California Civil Code requires consideration to create an agency relationship.
C.The fact that a buyer's agent receives compensation as a percentage of the total commission monies paid by the seller establishes an agency relationship between the buyer's agent and the seller.
Answer:
A. The creation or existence of a compensation agreement does not establish an agency relationship between the giver of compensation and the recipient
Explanation:
An agency cannot be implied between the giver of a compensation and the recipient. An agency can only exist between the individual who wishes to sell a property and his/her designated agent or representative.
Option A is true; the creation of a compensation agreement does not in itself establish an agency relationship. An agency relationship is based on factors like control and authority, and compensation is just one component that can be part of an agency contract.
Explanation:The question addresses the concept of agency relationships within a business context, particularly in regard to compensation and its impact on the establishment of such relationships. When it comes to the true statement among the provided options, A is correct: The creation or existence of a compensation agreement does not establish an agency relationship between the giver of compensation and the recipient. This is because an agency relationship typically involves an agent acting on behalf of a principal, and the mere existence of a compensation mechanism, such as a salary with a commission, does not by itself create this relationship. Factors such as control, consent, and authority to act on behalf of the principal contribute to the establishment of an agency relationship.
Furthermore, the context provided suggests that incentive structures, including commissions and salaries, are designed to align the interests of agents with those of the principal, addressing agency costs and incentivizing performance. While a compensation agreement can be part of an agency relationship, it is the terms and conditions of the relationship, agreed upon through a contract, which define the nature and extent of the agency.
Who led the argument before the supreme court in the brown v. Board of education case and later became a supreme court justice?
Answer:
Thurgood Marshall.Explanation:
Thurgood Marshall was the first Supreme Court justice of African descend. He was a lawyer by profession and played an important role in bringing racial equality and liberty during the Civil Rights Movement.
Marshall became a lawyer for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and it was during this time he served as chief attorney for the plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. He successfully led the case and won a unanimous verdict against school segregation.
This case helped him gain lots of recognition and admiration. President Johnson appointed him as the first African-American Supreme Court justice in 1967.
A child’s adoptive parents go to court to finalize the child’s adoption. This court would most likely be a court with which jurisdiction?
Answer:
Family Court under the jurisdiction of state supreme court.Explanation:
The state supreme courts maintain a court system where different cases are heard at different smaller courts. They normally consists of two sub-courts, one for civil appeals and one for criminal cases under its jurisdiction.
Adoption cases fall under civil procedure. At the state level, family courts are generally given jurisdiction over adoption cases. However, certain states have different courts which has jurisdiction over adoption cases.
In the case of Iowa state, adoption cases are settled either in district or juvenile courts.