Answer:
lose because employee contracts that restrict trade are illegal
Explanation:
The above case relates to the restraint of trade. Export limitations are a concept in customary law referring to the constitutionality in commercial limits on the right to do commerce. This is a forerunner to the current rule to competition.
A statutory commitment not to exchange is null and unenforceable towards the Promiser as opposed to the national policy of encouraging commerce, although the restriction of exchange is fair to preserve the rights of a trade buyer. Trade restrictions may also manifest as binding covenants in work arrangements throughout post-termination.
Answer:
The courts given people the same rights as other citizens.
Explanation:
Explanation:
In Reynolds v. Sims (1964), the Supreme Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that the legislative districts across states be equal in population
Answer:
Locke's idea of a social contract states that the government is able to govern only because the people have accepted to give up some of their freedom and authority. ... The Founding Fathers also believed that the government could only exist due to the acceptance of the people.
Explanation:
Answer:
Explanation:
Although it has been attempted to overturn the ruling in the Helling case, I would suppose that these attempts have been unsuccessful because the ruling was in favor of a higher standard of care than what was deemed appropriate by for the ophthalmologists. One might argue that the ruling has remained in place because holding the defendants liable was, in a way, a step towards checking the medical profession’s privilege to set it’s own standards. I feel as though legislature has probably not seen fit to reinforce it because the original ruling remains valid in that a doctor can follow all of the standards of care, and still be liable.
