Answer:
its the answer d cuz they do
Explanation:
<u>Answer</u>:
A. Concurring opinion
<u>Explanation</u>:
In law, a concurring opinion is in certain legal systems a written opinion by one or more judges of a court which agrees with the decision made by the majority of the court, but states different (or additional) reasons as the basis for his or her decision.
Plz rate as Brainliest
Answer:
No
Explanation:
Pam is not violating the law of demand. The law of demand suggests that the supply of a product varies with demand. When demand increases, price increases, when demand decreases, price decreases. Notice that Pam has decreased hamburger consumption, meaning it has contributed to the decrease in demand. If the demand for hamburgers has decreased, it is only natural that the price of hamburgers will decrease. It should be noted that even if the hamburger price had risen and Pam no longer consumed hamburgers, the law of demand would still not be violated. This is because the law of demand takes into account aggregate demand (from all consumers) rather than individual demand. So Pam could have stopped eating hamburger as a matter of preference for another item.
The leader of the Knights of Labor in 1879 is Terence V. Powderly.
Answer:
c. even if they are told to ignore the postevent information.
Explanation:
Lindsay’s misinformation effect experiment, in which participants were given a memory test about a sequence of slides showing a maintenance man stealing money and a computer, showed that participants are influenced by MPI even if they are told to ignore the postevent information.
