Answer:
keep practicing until you fully understand all rules you have to follow
The question is incomplete. This is the complete question:
The state trial court in Nevada has issued a decision in which a party has been found guilty of fraud. Should a case arise in the future with the same basic fact situation, Nevada courts will be bound by precedent to follow the reasoning and decision of this prior decision.
Answer:
No, should a case arise in the future with the same basic fact situation, Nevada state trial courts will not be bound by precedent to follow the reasoning and decision of this prior decision, because the decisions of trial courts do not use precedents or rulings established in previous legal cases to arrive at decisions on future disputes involving different or entirely new parties.
Answer:
The five reasons why a registrar could even legally refuse to recognize a partnership are as follows.
Explanation:
- The partnership or cooperation refers to someone who is not eligible for registration underneath the ordinance or Act.
- Some kind of commercial enterprise tends to occur throughout the unauthorized partnership.
- The alliance company name seems to be a deceptive or unwanted one.
- Throughout the previous 5 years, any of the clients were already implicated in and discovered to have been conducting fraud as well as deception, whether found guilty but not in connection through any commercial business or any other of the members is a child or unhealthy mind or perhaps a bankrupt uncharged.
- The declaration of the collaboration is inaccurate, infrequent as well as indistinct, or published on such a paper that is inadequately long-lasting for registering.
