Answer:
Nell’s debt to Olsen is past due. Olsen obtains an order of garnishment to require Nell’s employer Pro Transmission Service, Inc., to pay part of Nell’s paycheck to Olsen. The law <u>limits the amount that can be taken from Nell's take-home pay.</u>
Explanation:
A wage garnishment is when a court issues an order requiring your employer to withhold a certain amount of your paycheck and send it directly to the person or institution to whom you owe money, until your debt is paid off.
Answer:
Put simply, a criminal conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act. The agreement itself is the crime, but at least one co-conspirator must take an “overt act” in furtherance of the conspiracy. Under the federal conspiracy statute: The agreement by two or more persons is the essence of the crime.
Explanation:
Our question is this: What makes an act one of entrapment? We make a standard distinction between legal entrapment, which is carried out by parties acting in their capacities as (or as deputies of) law-enforcement agents, and civil entrapment, which is not. We aim to provide a definition of entrapment that covers both and which, for reasons we explain, does not settle questions of permissibility and culpability. We explain, compare, and contrast two existing definitions of legal entrapment to commit a crime that possess this neutrality. We point out some problems with the extensional correctness of these definitions and propose a new definition that resolves these problems. We then extend our definition to provide a more general definition of entrapment, encompassing both civil and legal cases. Our definition is, we believe, closer to being extensionally correct and will, we hope, provide a clearer basis for future discussions about the ethics of entrapment than do the definitions upon which it improves.
Answer:
Federal court.
Explanation:
From the question, we can see that the competitor of the company -- ABC Inc. is the plaintiff that sues its competitor for trademark infringement. ABC inc. has the right to sue its competitor in both state courts and federal court. ABC Inc. can sue the competitor in the state court if the violations of the registered trademark is only done in one state but if it is more than one states, the it will be be the case of a federal court. Furthermore, the trademark was registered Federally, ABC Inc. are definitely going to sue in a federal court.
Answer:Police brutality or police violence, is legally defined as a civil rights violation where officers exercise undue or excessive force against a civilian. This includes, but is not limited to, physical or verbal harassment, physical or mental injury, property damage, and death
Explanation:
