Answer: Students may pay if the University distributes the funds in a Viewpoint Neutral Way.
Explanation:
In the case, Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v. Southworth (2000), the Court ruled that students do not need to pay fees if those fees will be used to sponsor groups that some students find objectionable if the University did so in a <em>Viewpoint Discriminatory way</em>.
A Viewpoint discriminatory way goes against the First Amendment clause of <em>Viewpoint Neutrality</em> which posits that if Government actions have the effect on stamping on a group's right to speech then they must do so for all groups and not just a few.
The University should therefore fund all the groups in a viewpoint neutral manner for the students to have to pay fees.
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Since the proposed plan increases the firm's financial risk, the stock price might fall even if EPS increases.
Answer:
310-10-50-8
Codification citation for trade receivables that do not accrue interent until a specified period has elapsed, non accrual status would be the point when accrual is suspended after the receivable becomes past due.
Explanation:
Accounting standards codification is the source of authoritative generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) recognized by the FASB to be applied to non governmental entities.
The provision is not enforceable if it is a reasonable estimate of the loss on the breach.
Option - b
<u>
Explanation:
</u>
There are a few solutions for rupture of agreement, for example, grant of harms, explicit execution, rescission, and restitution. In courts of restricted purview, the fundamental cure is an honor of harms.
Since explicit execution and rescission are evenhanded cures that don't fall inside the purview of the officer courts, they are not canvassed in this instructional exercise.
The count of compensatory harms relies upon the kind of agreement that was broken and the sort of misfortune that was caused. Some broad rules are:
Standard measure, The standard proportion of harms is a sum that would permit the no breaching gathering to purchase a substitute for the advantage that would have been gotten if the agreement had been performed.
In situations where the expense of the substitute is theoretical, the no breaching gathering may recoup harms in the measure of the expense caused in playing out that gathering's commitments under the agreement.
