Answer:
- Talking about the conversation with a compliance officer of his firm
- Accept unsolicited trades from costumers in the company's stock
Explanation:
The agent listened to another company's employee talking on the phone about confidential information, that is, private information that the agent should not be listening to, but he has heard and can use it to his company's advantage. Since no one knows that the agent has this information, he can talk about the conversation he has heard with a compliance officer at his company, and he can accept unsolicited dealings from customers on the company's stock.
Answer:
You are the trial judge at the sentencing hearing. If you wish, you can rely on the suppressed confession for a sentence enhancement, in effect imposing the same sentence Bertha would have received for second-degree murder. Should you do so? Why or why not?
b. If you were on the appellate court reviewing Bertha’s sentence imposed as described in (a), would you rule that this sentence is fair?
Answer and explanation:
The statute of frauds requires certain types of contracts to be in writing, but there exceptions. One of those would be the situation of working for an employer for the rest of your life.
This is an oral employement contract scenario and doesn't necessarily must be written in order for it to be enforceable. For this contract to be, in fact, enforceable, the promise should be crystal clear about the employer's right to extinguish.
Answer:
A
Explanation:
The state controls what a school is required to do in order to pass its students. The other 3 options are a matter of the federal govt aka it being national issues, which means the state govts have no control over those issues or topics
