<span>Is this a matter of constitutional, criminal, civil, or military law? How do you know? It's a civil law because it's a misunderstanding between two civilians.
</span><span>Is the source of the law a statute, regulation, case law, or combination? How do you know? I believe it might be a combination of statue and regulation law because there's some documentation and exchange item.
</span>Determine the purpose of the law related to the scenario. Is the law intended to protect people's safety or people's rights? It is to protect the people's rights, not safety. " She says that he has not made any payments and still has possession of the car." <span>The disagreement is over a vehicle which is just property.
</span>Do you think the young woman has a valid argument that her neighbor owes her payment for the car? In other words, should government make an exception to the law about the owner being the person whose name is on the title? I think she does not have a valid argument. "<span> She signed ownership over to him on the title, which he also signed. She says that he has not made any payments and still has possession of the car." </span><span>If she wants to sell her car, she should have done it the proper way, otherwise she should be prepared to meet the consequences.
</span>
Answer:
You did not give us The choices.
Explanation:
Answer:
A. The war began because of an assassination.
Hope this helps!
During the 1800s and early 1900s various ethnic groups were restricted from immigrating. Mainly asian (and specifically chinese) people were discriminated against. The <u>Exclusion Act of 1882</u> is considered by many historians to be the first <u>explicit</u> exclusionary immigration restriction made to one particular nationality in its entirety. Immigration of chinese laborers was prohibited right then. This was largely the result of racial prejudice from the American people and their authorities.
Hope this helps!
