Answer:
The British approach appears to be more effective and even more efficient.
Explanation:
The British approach eliminates the tendency of lawyers to coach the witnesses to produce required answers. This means that using the British approach, witnesses are not properly prepared with correctly rehearsed answers to questions. The discovery of the case by both lawyers happens in the courtroom and not at a pretrial stage. With the British approach, courtroom lawyers are responsible for conducting the opening statement, direct examination of witnesses, closing statement, and cross-examination of witnesses.
Answer:
The correct answer to the following question will be the "Federal Trade Commission Act".
Explanation:
- A federal law enacted in the U.S to establish the Federal Trade Commission that would provide the American government with a full series of legal measures that could be used against anti-competitive, discriminatory and misleading market activities.
- The FTC wants to enforce federal consumer laws to protect privacy and abuse, frustration, and unreasonable activity.
Therefore, FTC is the right answer.
Answer:
a. How will the $20,000 payments be treated by Fred and Tammy if covered by prior law? b. How will the payments be treated if the divorce is covered by new law? c. What is Tammy's basis in the residence? d. What role would a tax adviser play in a divorce?
Explanation:
a. For Fred, the 20,000 must be included in income. There is no deduction for paying alimony. For Tammy, the amount is not included in income.
b. If the divorce was complete prior to December 31, 2018, Fred can deduct the $20,000 payments as alimony.
If the divorce was complete prior to December 31, 2018, Tammy must include the $20,000 payments in gross income.
c. It's $100.000,00
d. Tax advisors are responsible for determining the value of property given in lieu of cash for an alimony payment.
Answer:
Correct Answer:
E. That the manufacturer did not give a sample or a model of the seeds.
Explanation:
As an attorney of the manufacturer, the best argument in the case between my client and the seed buyer, Joe would be on the fact that, the manufacturer did not give a sample or model of the seeds to Joe to verify if it meets his requirements.
<em>Also, Joe never requested to see sample of the seeds as was standard with buying of agricultural products.</em>
1. Fingerprints, Video surveillance and neighbors that witnessed the burglary.
2. bullet casings video street evidence witnesses on the scene.
3. DNA of any kind ,notes, receipts The product that they made and it's consistency to match to what is found on the streets being sold.
