Answer:
The collaboration is similar, but the legal context differs.
Explanation:
Answer:
not required to hear the case.
Explanation:
The United States Court of Appeals is also known as the circuit courts that are the intermediate appellate courts. The US courts of appeals are one of the most powerful as well influential courts in America.
In the context, Boyd flies a case against Cathy in the federal district court where Cathy loses the case. She then makes an appeal to the circuit courts or the United States Court of Appeals for a second circuit but she loses again. Now if Cathy moves to the Supreme Court of the U.S. and makes an appeal, the Supreme Court is not required to hear Cathy's case as she already made an appeal in the Court of Appeals of U.S. and The court has made his judgement.
<em>the incident was reasonably foreseeable.</em>
It comes from the Latin word "forensis" pertaining to a forum. ... The meaning of "forensic" later came to be restricted to refer to the courts of law. The word entered English usage in 1659.
Answer:
The legal school of thought illustrated in this dialogue is:
Law and economics school of thought.
Explanation:
The law and economics school of thought postulates that economic analyses, theories, and methods should be brought to the practice and interpretation of laws. This means that the tools of economic reasoning are the best tools for justified and consistent legal practices. This school of thought is significantly one of the dominant theories of jurisprudence.