When state law and federal law conflict, federal law displaces, or preempts, state law, due to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. ... Preemption applies regardless of whether the conflicting laws come from legislatures, courts, administrative agencies, or constitutions.
Answer:
A) Yes, because Rule 1.16(a) requires a lawyer to reject representation if the representation will result in violation of law. Here, the attorney helped his client conceal assets, which is a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 because the assets were the proceeds of a crime.
Explanation:
Rule 1.16: Declining or Terminating Representation
(a) Except as stated in paragraph (c), a lawyer shall not represent a client or, where representation has commenced, shall withdraw from the representation of a client if:
(1) the representation will result in violation of the rules of professional conduct or other law;
(2) the lawyer's physical or mental condition materially impairs the lawyer's ability to represent the client; or
(3) the lawyer is discharged.
Answer:
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a landmark 1954 Supreme Court case in which the justices ruled unanimously that racial segregation of children in public schools was unconstitutional.
Explanation:
please mark this answer as brainliest
Either due to a settlement, or the victim party deciding not to press charges
Answer: No, because a dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction is not on the merits.
Explanation:
Following the information given in the question, it should be noted that the case should not be dismissed by the court due to the fact that the dismissal is based on the lack of personal jurisdiction.
It should be noted that the claim preclusion should be added to the answer of the defendant as it's an affirmative defense and it requires more than the claimant bringing a case against the same defendant.
