Answer:reversed and remanded
Explanation:
- In the drunk driving case
- judge discovered and concluded that they had no obligation to volunteer helping the person whose injury they were not responsible for and did not have an hand or part that they played in causing such an injury.
Plaintiff appealed
- Appellate or appeal court established that there was enough evidence for a jury to find defendants liable for negligence because they had aided & abetted Mairs' wrongful post-accident conduct by not acting reasonably under the circumstances to assist Podias, such as calling 911.
They should have foreseen this danger because:
(1) there is a risk of harm that may result from leaving lying in the middle of the road knowing that someone is incapable of helping themselves.
(2) failure of defendants to call for help or take measures that will help the plaintiff.
(3) if one is aware of all the risks and damage that will result from their inability to take action that will help they are liable for the harm caused .
Reversed means that a decision taken by the lower court is not accepted by a higher court .
Remanded means the higher court send back the case that they reject to the lower court to be continued further.
Answer: c. how his decision will affect the rights of his employees, his consumers, and others.
Explanation: The principle of rights theory prioritizes human rights above all else. If applied to a business, it is more important than the goal to make profit and is key to the goal of the business.
Some common rights are the rights to life, freedom and equality. Because Jeff uses this principle to make ethical decisions for his business, he will consider how his decision to expand into Asia will affect his employees, his consumers and other stakeholders such as suppliers or shareholders.
He was born January 20, 1716
Answer:
no
Explanation:
bribery is not good because it brings a state backwards
