Initially, a defendant's case is at a trial court (Federal, State, Circuit Courts).
Then the case proceeds to the Court of Appeal before finally moving to the Supreme Court of the state or at the federal level.
But it is not true that all cases must move to the Supreme Court when the defendant appeals. The movement to the highest court requires the acceptance of the defendant's argument and the merit of each case.
Thus, the defendant's case can move from a <em>trial court,</em><em> an </em><em>appeals court,</em><em> and then to the </em><em>supreme court.</em>
Learn more: brainly.com/question/11640159
Answer:
Federal court.
Explanation:
From the question, we can see that the competitor of the company -- ABC Inc. is the plaintiff that sues its competitor for trademark infringement. ABC inc. has the right to sue its competitor in both state courts and federal court. ABC Inc. can sue the competitor in the state court if the violations of the registered trademark is only done in one state but if it is more than one states, the it will be be the case of a federal court. Furthermore, the trademark was registered Federally, ABC Inc. are definitely going to sue in a federal court.
The Scott test is a preliminary colorimetric method to analyze cocaine. A blue color result in the final step denotes a positive indication for cocaine; however, some pharmacological products may lead to false positives when concentration is higher than 1 mg
Answer:
Although there <em>are</em> mutual funds with no minimums, most retail mutual funds do require a minimum initial investment of between $500 to $5,000
Answer: both of them will have the fault.
Explanation:well, if I were to be the Judge of this case, I will hold both to be at fault. On Sutton's part, she leased the house out and she should have kept it in a good shape. Though the house was not in good shape, Laws had lodge series of complaints concerning the disrepair, which means that Sutton should have had it repaired.
Sutton promised Laws that he was going to repair the stairs, so, I would say, Laws would have assumed that Sutton would have repaired the stairs before he(laws) returned back from his business trip.
However, we should not forget that whenever we assess a situation according to the law there must have been a legal contract but in this case, Laws never entered into a contract with Sutton to make the repairs. Which means that Laws cannot fully blame Sutton. Therefore, i will hold both responsible.
