I believe the answer is: Nitric oxide
<span>Nitric oxide could be synthesized on demand, because it is considered to be membrane permeant that cannot be stored. Calcium influx through </span><span>The N-methyl-D-aspartate </span>receptor activates nitric oxide synthase (NOS), which synthesizes Nitric oxide from L-arginine which allow it <span> to act as a retrograde messenger from the dendrite to the terminal button. </span>
Answer:
parol evidence
Explanation:
Based on the scenario being described it can be said that the admission of Brogan's testimony is most likely governed by the parol evidence rule. This rule created to prevent a party from introducing evidence before the agreement was made final in order to change the existing contract. Which is what Brogan is doing in this scenario by trying to release evidence about his age before the finalization of the contract.
Well, before you start, you need to choose a side. If you are confused on the phrasing, it is simply asking:
Do you agree that the Supreme Court should be able to think of the law differently during a case to fit with current views?
After that, start thinking of why.
Yes, they should, the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to change as societal views changed.
No, they shouldn't, just because societal views are changing, what we need for our country to run smoothly is the same as it has been,
Hope I could help!
