those systems that provide information needed for supervisory, allocation, strategic, tactical, policy, and administrative decisions are .

Answer:

What Is a Quasi Contract?

A Quasi Contract is a retroactive arrangement between two parties who have no previous obligations to one another. It is created by a judge to correct a circumstance in which one party acquires something at the expense of the other.

The main difference between descriptive (aka delegate) and substantive (trustee) representation lies in how legislators approach policy decisions. Descriptive representation involves legislators directly carrying out the policy preferences and desires of their constituents, while substantive representation involves legislators weighing the interests of their constituents alongside national and collective concerns.

In descriptive representation, legislators act as delegates and prioritize the specific policy preferences and desires of their constituents. They are expected to closely align their votes and actions with the majority opinion of their constituents, acting as a direct representative of their interests. This approach emphasizes the importance of accurately reflecting the will of the people and maintaining a strong connection with the local community.

On the other hand, substantive representation, also known as trustee representation, involves legislators considering a broader set of factors when making policy decisions. In addition to the desires of their constituents, substantive representatives take into account national and collective concerns, such as the overall welfare of the nation, the impact on different groups of people, and the long-term consequences of their decisions. They exercise their own judgment and expertise to make decisions that they believe are in the best interest of the entire society.

Overall, the main difference between descriptive and substantive representation lies in the level of autonomy and decision-making power given to legislators. Descriptive representation emphasizes direct responsiveness to constituent preferences, while substantive representation allows for a broader consideration of national and collective interests.

To know more about substantive click here:

https://brainly.com/question/30562013

#SPJ11

Answer: Family law is handled by the California Superior Court.

Explanation:

Answer:

gaily cort

Explanation:

guiiiiiiiifet6jnff

Answer:

D: Installation of security cameras

Explanation:

it would be against chris because he cooked the food (is the owner aswell) because dan did't know that the food was contaminated.

Explanation:

Shondra is member of an industrial union if she has worked at both local and state level in this position.

Workers in Finland's light and heavy industries are represented by the Industrial Union, a trade union. On January 1, 2018, the Industrial Union TEAM combined with the Metalworkers' Union and the Wood and Allied Workers' Union to form the union. It joined the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions, much like its forerunners. The Industrial Federation's representatives expressed their optimism that the Paperworkers' Union will join within a few years despite the union's decision to opt out of the merger that created it. The building and woodworkers' international, the International Association of food, agricultural, hotel, restaurant, catering, tobacco other allied workers' associations, and the UNI Worldwide Union are the four global union federations to which the union belongs.

To learn more about state, visit:

https://brainly.com/question/20372541

#SPJ4

In the article, Cesar Chavez argues for the use of nonviolent resistance as a means of achieving social change. He begins by reflecting on the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who also advocated for nonviolent resistance as a means of achieving civil rights for African Americans.

Chavez then goes on to describe his own experiences with nonviolent resistance, including his work with the United Farm Workers (UFW) union. Chavez's rhetorical choices in the article are designed to persuade his readers to support the use of nonviolent resistance as a means of achieving social change. He begins by linking his own work with the UFW to the legacy of Dr. King, suggesting that their methods are part of a larger tradition of nonviolent resistance. This helps to establish his credibility and authority on the topic, as he is positioning himself as a continuation of this tradition.

Overall, Chavez's rhetorical choices in the article are designed to persuade his readers to support the use of nonviolent resistance as a means of achieving social change. He uses a variety of techniques, including empathy, data, and ethical appeals, to make his argument more compelling and to establish his credibility as a leader in the civil rights movement.  

Learn more about Cesar Chavez Visit: brainly.com/question/1225845

#SPJ4

Answer: See explanation

Explanation:

Office of Personnel Management - This office is responsible for the management of the civil service and is also responsible for employing new employees and managing their pensions and other retirement benefits.

The also ensure that insurance are provided to the government workers.

Merit System Protection Board - This ensures that there's an efrwctice and efficient workforce. It also ensures that excellent services are given to the citizens by the workers.

Office of the Government Ethics: It is charged with the responsibility of overseeing and guiding the government employees and ensuring that ethic laws are been maintained. It ensures that conflict of interest among employees are prevented.

These agencies are important because they ensure that the aims of the government are met through the provision of necessary materials to ensure improvement in workers productivity and conditions and also monitoring of employees to ensure that the goals of the government are met.

The Federal Office of Personnel Management:

-Serves as the administrator of Human Resources among the offices of the federal government. They oversee payroll and all the administrative issues regarding transfers of employees within the offices of the government.

The Merit Systems Protection Board:
-Is in charge of making sure all federal merit systems are correctly applied and gives a ruling regarding disputes between federal employees and their workplaces.

The Office of Government Ethics:
-Is in charge of overseeing the ethics program that is designed to solve conflicts of interest that may generate among employees in the offices of government.

These 3 offices are important because they help improve the overall development of employees working for the government.




Have a great rest of your day
#TheWizzer

Answer:

uhm go to prom with that man rn IF U DONT-

Explanation:

do it you only live once. you guys obviously know each other. your mom never has to know

Answer:

No

Explanation:

just tell him sorry and that my mom doesnt allow me. and try to sound as sad and pitiful as possible

Answer:

They are identified in the ground below and around the corpse, also by their large plump bodies and rasping teeth.

Answer:

in the ground below and around the corpse

Explanation:

For criminal history data, audio response terminals, radio devices, and digital or voice telephones may all be used in different ways. Audio response terminals can be used to access criminal history data and other information quickly and efficiently.

Radio devices are often used by law enforcement personnel to communicate with each other and coordinate responses to criminal activity. Digital or voice telephones can be used to gather information from witnesses or to report criminal activity to the authorities. However, it is important to note that there are limitations to the use of these devices when it comes to criminal history data. For example, accessing criminal history data through an audio response terminal may only provide limited information and may not be as comprehensive as accessing the information through other means. Similarly, using radio devices or digital/voice telephones to communicate about criminal activity may not always be secure and could potentially put sensitive information at risk. As such, it is important to carefully consider the appropriate use of these devices when it comes to criminal history data and other sensitive information.

to know about criminal history visit:

https://brainly.com/question/30401483

#SPJ11

The ultimate objective of the investigation, according to Captain Cochran, is to locate tangible evidence.

Establishing pertinent facts to support or refute allegations of fraud and corruption is the goal of an investigation. It is a legally mandated fact-finding process that is carried out in an objective, impartial manner with the goal of establishing the pertinent facts and making recommendations in this regard.

In the context of law enforcement, an interrogation is when a representative of the organization questions suspects, victims, or witnesses in order to learn more about a crime. The resolution of the crime is the ultimate goal of an interrogation. A suspect may be questioned for a short while or for several hours.

According to Captain Cochran, finding physical evidence exists the highest purpose of the investigation.

Therefore, the correct answer is option a) To find physical evidence.

To learn more about investigation refer to:

https://brainly.com/question/25578076

#SPJ4

Legal principles expressed for the first time in court decisions are called common law.

Common law refers to a legal system where the law is created based on past legal decisions or precedents, as opposed to statutes written by the legislative branch or regulations issued by the executive branch. Legal principles that are established for the first time in court decisions become part of the common law tradition. Once a principle is established, it becomes a precedent, which is a legal decision or judgment that serves as an authoritative rule or pattern in future cases that have similar issues or facts.This system of common law developed in England and was later adopted by many other countries, including the United States. Under common law, judges have the authority to interpret the law and make decisions based on their interpretation of past legal decisions. The principle of stare decisis, which means "to stand by things decided," is a cornerstone of common law and requires judges to follow precedents set by higher courts when deciding cases with similar facts and legal issues. Answers:a. Statutory law refers to written laws created by the legislative branch.b. Stare decisis is a principle of common law that requires judges to follow past legal decisions or precedents.c. Common law is a legal system based on past legal decisions or precedents.d. Precedents are legal decisions or judgments that serve as authoritative rules or patterns in future cases.

To know more about legal visit:

brainly.com/question/31302898

#SPJ11

Answer:

a.they are sometimes called community supervision officers

hope this helps :)

Explanation:

Answer:

They are sometimes called community supervision officers.

Just took the test :)

Answer:

National security is important because it's for the safety of the people living in a certain country, for them to be secured from any danger that might happen to them.

Explanation:

hope it helps you po.

Answer:

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States—including former slaves—and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws.” One of three amendments passed during the Reconstruction era to abolish slavery and establish.

I think this is fine for you

Answer: Marks States We are constantly told that conflict is bad that compromise is good; that conflict is bad but the consensus is good; that conflict is bad and collaboration is good. But in my view, that's far too simple a vision of the world. We cannot know whether conflict is bad unless we know who is fighting, why they are fighting ,and how they are fighting. And compromises can be thoroughly rotten if they harm people who are not at the table, people who are vulnerable, disempowered, people whom we have an obligation to protect.

Explanation:

A minor must appear in court with their parent or legal guardian and complete a driving safety course in order to get court supervision for a traffic offence. Hence, the statement is TRUE.

Did you know that a parent or legal guardian can revoke a minor's driver's license at any time before the age of 18?

Some states mandate a minimum of 50 hours of supervised driving behind the wheel for children or those under the age of 16. It is required in order to obtain a driver's license.

Drivers who are minor or under the age of 18 must hold their instruction permit for nine months prior to receiving their driver's license.

Find out what is NOT a punishment for committing a traffic violation here: https://brainly.com/question/10464560

#SPJ4

Answer: Victimless crimes are, in the harm principle of John Stuart Mill, "victimless" from a position that considers the individual as the sole sovereign, to the exclusion of more abstract bodies such as a community or a state against which criminal offenses may be directed. They may be considered offenses against the state rather than society.

Explanation:

Answer:whats the question

Explanation:

Answer:

A party is bound by the terms of a contract once it is signed whether or not the party has read or understood the terms in a contract (L'Estrange Rule). However, a signature is not binding where it was obtained by a fraud or misrepresentation, or where document was not known to be a contract by the party signing it (absence of "Intent".).

In the given case, there is a misrepresentation by Sly as a loan document was presented to Wilona as a tax receipt. Therefore, Wilona could repudiate the terms mentioned in the document.

Explanation:

A party is bound by the terms of a contract once it is signed whether or not the party has read or understood the terms in a contract (L'Estrange Rule). However, a signature is not binding where it was obtained by a fraud or misrepresentation, or where document was not known to be a contract by the party signing it (absence of "Intent".).

In the given case, there is a misrepresentation by Sly as a loan document was presented to Wilona as a tax receipt. Therefore, Wilona could repudiate the terms mentioned in the document.

The statement that past consideration is irrelevant in the doctrine of Consideration is not entirely accurate. While past consideration generally lacks legal enforceability, there are exceptions where past consideration can be deemed valid.

Three applicable case laws on this subject matter are discussed below: Roscorla v. Thomas (1842): In this case, the plaintiff purchased a horse from the defendant. After the sale was complete, the defendant made a statement regarding the horse's soundness, which turned out to be false. The plaintiff sued for breach of warranty. The issue was whether the defendant's statement could be considered valid consideration. The court held that past consideration is insufficient, and there must be a present consideration to support a contract.

Lampleigh v. Braithwait (1615): The plaintiff had rendered services to the defendant by securing a pardon from the king. Afterward, the defendant promised to pay the plaintiff for his services. When the defendant refused to honor the promise, the plaintiff sued. The issue was whether the past consideration of the plaintiff's services was sufficient. The court held that although past consideration is generally insufficient, if it was done at the request of the promisor and with an expectation of reward, it could be valid consideration.

Re McArdle (1951): In this case, the family members of a deceased person agreed to distribute the deceased's estate according to his wishes. The plaintiff, one of the family members, carried out the deceased's wishes but was not compensated as promised. The issue was whether the past consideration of the plaintiff's actions constituted valid consideration. The court held that past consideration is not good consideration, and the plaintiff could not enforce the promise.

In conclusion, the statement that past consideration is irrelevant in the doctrine of Consideration is not entirely accurate. While past consideration is generally deemed insufficient to support a contract, there are exceptions where it can be considered valid. The cases of Roscorla v.

Thomas and Re McArdle demonstrate that past consideration alone is not enough to enforce a promise. However, the case of Lampleigh v. Braithwait highlights an exception to this rule, where past consideration can be valid if it was done at the promisor's request and with an expectation of reward.

Therefore, it is essential to consider the specific circumstances and nature of the promise when determining the relevance of past consideration.

To learn more about doctrine click here: brainly.com/question/12375851

#SPJ11

The statement that past consideration is irrelevant in the doctrine of Consideration is not entirely accurate. While past consideration generally lacks legal enforceability, there are exceptions where past consideration can be deemed valid.

Three applicable case laws on this subject matter are discussed below: Roscorla v. Thomas (1842): In this case, the plaintiff purchased a horse from the defendant. After the sale was complete, the defendant made a statement regarding the horse's soundness, which turned out to be false. The plaintiff sued for breach of warranty.

The issue was whether the defendant's statement could be considered valid consideration. The court held that past consideration is insufficient, and there must be a present consideration to support a contract.

Lampleigh v. Braithwait (1615): The plaintiff had rendered services to the defendant by securing a pardon from the king. Afterward, the defendant promised to pay the plaintiff for his services. When the defendant refused to honor the promise, the plaintiff sued.

The issue was whether the past consideration of the plaintiff's services was sufficient. The court held that although past consideration is generally insufficient, if it was done at the request of the promisor and with an expectation of reward, it could be valid consideration.

Re McArdle (1951): In this case, the family members of a deceased person agreed to distribute the deceased's estate according to his wishes. The plaintiff, one of the family members, carried out the deceased's wishes but was not compensated as promised. The issue was whether the past consideration of the plaintiff's actions constituted valid consideration. The court held that past consideration is not good consideration, and the plaintiff could not enforce the promise.

In conclusion, the statement that past consideration is irrelevant in the doctrine of Consideration is not entirely accurate. While past consideration is generally deemed insufficient to support a contract, there are exceptions where it can be considered valid. The cases of Roscorla v.

To learn more about doctrine click here: brainly.com/question/12375851

#SPJ11

Answer:

your future value would be $735.03

Paradigm shifts occur when one set of thoughts, ideas, beliefs, values, and practices are challenged and then scientific discipline.  replaced with a new set of ideas, thoughts, beliefs, values, and practices.

In other words, a paradigm shift is a fundamental change in the way we perceive the world around us and the way we think about it. This shift often happens in science and technology, where new discoveries challenge existing theories and lead to new ways of understanding the world.

Paradigm shifts can also happen in other areas such as politics, economics, and culture. In these areas, a paradigm shift can occur when new ideas challenge existing beliefs and practices and lead to new ways of doing things.

One example of a paradigm shift is the shift from the geocentric model of the universe to the heliocentric model. For centuries, people believed that the Earth was at the center of the universe and that everything revolved around it. However, the work of scientists like Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler challenged this belief and led to the development of the heliocentric model, where the sun is at the center of the universe.

In conclusion, paradigm shifts occur when existing ideas, beliefs, values, and practices are challenged and replaced with new ideas, beliefs, values, and practices. These shifts can happen in science, technology, politics, economics, and culture, and they can lead to significant changes in the way we perceive the world around us and the way we think about it.

Know more about Paradigm shifts here:

https://brainly.com/question/13991373

#SPJ8

Answer:

The Supreme Court's opinion in the Brown v. Board of Education case of 1954 legally ended decades of racial segregation in America's public schools. Originally named after Oliver Brown, the first of many plaintiffs listed in the lower court case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, KS, the landmark decision actually resolved six separate segregation cases from four states, consolidated under the name Brown v. Board of Education. While the attorneys originally argued the cases on appeal to the Court in 1952, the featured document, School Segregation Cases - Order of Argument, offers a window into the three days in December of 1953 during which the attorneys reargued the cases.

A reargument was necessary because the Court desired briefs from both sides that would answer five questions, all having to do with the attorneys' opinions on whether or not Congress had segregation in public schools in mind when the 14th amendment was ratified. The document lists the names of each case, the states from which they came, the order in which the Court heard them, the names of the attorneys for the appellants and appellees, the total time allotted for arguments, and the dates over which the arguments took place.

The first case listed, Briggs v. Elliott, originated in Clarendon County, South Carolina, in the fall of 1950. Harry Briggs was one of twenty plaintiffs who were charging that R.W. Elliott, as president of the Clarendon County School Board, violated their right to equal protection under the fourteenth amendment by upholding the county's segregated education law. Briggs featured social science testimony on behalf of the plaintiffs from some of the nation's leading child psychologists, such as Dr. Kenneth Clark, whose famous doll study concluded that segregation negatively affected the self-esteem and psyche of African-American children. Such testimony was groundbreaking because on only one other occasion in U.S. history had a plaintiff attempted to present such evidence before the Court.

Explanation:

The legal advice that would be given here would depend on whether or not the person who accepted to purchase the shock absorber acted as an agent or broker.

A broker is described as a person or organization that negotiates contracts and serves as a middleman between a buyer and a seller in exchange for a fee.

A broker is a non-party to a transaction and is distinct from an agent, who represents the primary party in a transaction.

It is important to note that the element that changes the equation is whether or not the "someone" carried out the above transaction for a fee to them.

If they did, the they may be liable to ensure that you got proper value for money. If not, then they are not liable, they were simply acting on your instruction.

Another line of recourse would be to check the warranties and guaranties given on the product that was purchased.

Learn more about agency:
https://brainly.com/question/23534924
#SPJ1

A plaintiff wins a lawsuit in a civil case when he is 51% convincing. After winning the case, he collects 100% of his damages.

Yes, the result is reasonable because in a civil lawsuit, the burden of proof is lower than that in a criminal case. In a criminal case, the defendant must be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, which means that the jury must be virtually certain of the defendant's guilt. A civil case, on the other hand, only requires the plaintiff to prove that their claims are more likely than not to be true. This is often referred to as a preponderance of the evidence, which means that there is more evidence supporting the plaintiff's claims than there is supporting the defendant's claims.

In addition, a civil lawsuit is typically about resolving a dispute between two parties, whereas a criminal trial is about punishing someone for committing a crime. Because the stakes are lower in a civil case, it makes sense that the burden of proof would be lower as well. Allowing a plaintiff to win a case when they are only 51% convincing is a way to ensure that the party who is more likely to be in the right is the one who is awarded damages. Overall, the burden of proof in civil cases is a reasonable standard that strikes a balance between protecting the rights of the plaintiff and ensuring that the defendant is not punished unjustly.

Learn more about lawsuit from the given link:

https://brainly.com/question/30392587

#SPJ11

A plaintiff wins a lawsuit in a civil case when he is 51% convincing. After winning the case, he collects 100% of his damages.

Yes, the result is reasonable because in a civil lawsuit, the burden of proof is lower than that in a criminal case. In a criminal case, the defendant must be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, which means that the jury must be virtually certain of the defendant's guilt. A civil case, on the other hand, only requires the plaintiff to prove that their claims are more likely than not to be true. This is often referred to as a preponderance of the evidence, which means that there is more evidence supporting the plaintiff's claims than there is supporting the defendant's claims.

In addition, a civil lawsuit is typically about resolving a dispute between two parties, whereas a criminal trial is about punishing someone for committing a crime. Because the stakes are lower in a civil case, it makes sense that the burden of proof would be lower as well. Allowing a plaintiff to win a case when they are only 51% convincing is a way to ensure that the party who is more likely to be in the right is the one who is awarded damages. Overall, the burden of proof in civil cases is a reasonable standard that strikes a balance between protecting the rights of the plaintiff and ensuring that the defendant is not punished unjustly.

Learn more about lawsuit from the given link:

brainly.com/question/30392587

#SPJ11

Ensuring that the company is using the most effective marketing plan is not one of the purposes of an internal control system.

The primary purpose of an internal control system is to provide reasonable assurance that an entity will achieve its objectives regarding reliability of financial reporting, effectiveness and efficiency of operations, compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and safeguarding of assets.

The objectives of an internal control system are to prevent and detect fraud, error, and mismanagement; verify accuracy of accounts; authorize and record transactions; maintain accountability of assets; improve operational efficiency; and ensure compliance with public laws.

To know more about internal control system , click here:

https://brainly.com/question/29870556

#SPJ4

Answer:

Taking samples to see what poisons were used and handling the samples

The ethical issues related to neutrality and confidentiality in mediation and negotiation involve maintaining impartiality and keeping sensitive information confidential.

Mediators and negotiators have ethical obligations to remain neutral and maintain confidentiality. Neutrality requires the mediator to remain impartial and not favor any party in the mediation or negotiation.

Confidentiality means that any information disclosed during the process should not be shared with third parties without consent. Ethical issues arise when the mediator or negotiator breaches these obligations, which can damage trust and compromise the effectiveness of the process. For example, breaching confidentiality can lead to the disclosure of sensitive information, while failing to remain neutral can result in unfair treatment of one party over the other.

Learn more about Mediation and Negotiation on:

https://brainly.com/question/30613208

#SPJ1

This post provides a concise and accurate overview of copyright laws and their purpose.

It correctly explains that copyright laws protect the rights of creators by preventing unauthorized copying and distribution of their work. It also mentions the exclusive rights granted to copyright owners and highlights the importance of permission and authorization for copying, distributing, and creating derivative works.

The post acknowledges that copyright protection is not absolute and mentions the role of the U.S. Copyright Office in registration. Furthermore, it emphasizes the significance of copyright laws in providing stability and protecting the creative rights of individuals.

Thus, the post effectively communicates the key aspects of copyright laws and their role in safeguarding intellectual property.

Learn more about copyright laws here:

https://brainly.com/question/22089522

#SPJ1