Hi there! Hopefully this helps!
Answer: B.
Answer:
Commander in chief and head of the judicial branch
Explanation:
I like the first photo a lot get it girlll
Answer:
Loose constructionism is an ideological position of legal interpretation (especially of the Constitution) by means of which the judges have the power not only to judge compliance with the different laws, but also to interpret the text of the legal provisions of the Constitution, defining its scope and content.
Two arguments in favor of this position are, on the one hand, that the Constitution is not a rigid law but that it is constantly being modified through jurisprudential interpretations, with which it is necessary for judges to be able to interpret its clauses in a lax way; and on the other, that a rigid Constitution would be easily set aside by society, since it would not adapt to changes in circumstances on its part.
Answer: The physician is being sued. Insurance company should provide an attorney. If the doctor is negligent, insurance company should pay (that's why we have premiums). Dr. Z is sued, goes to agency, and notifies the agency. The agency doesn't notify Aetna in right amount of time, and also notifies the wrong company. Aetna doesn't have a liability because they were not notified in a timely manner. Larson is agent to Aetna. A principal's notice to agent=notice to principal. That's the same as notifying Aetna according to its claims procedure. This is not Dr.Z's problem. Aetna is wrong in denying coverage, and Dr.Z will succeed and not have to pay.
