1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
rewona [7]
2 years ago
6

"In American Express v. Italian Colors Restaurant, American Express (Amex) entered into agreements with Italian Colors Restauran

t and other merchants that accept American Express credit cards. The agreement required that all disputes be settled through arbitration and prohibited class actions. The merchants filed a class action antitrust claim against Amex, arguing that they should be allowed to bring the claim as a class because the cost of expert analysis to prove the case exceeded the maximum recovery available to an individual merchant plaintiff. How did the U.S. Supreme Court decide?
Law
1 answer:
natita [175]2 years ago
3 0

Answer:

U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of American Express (Amex)

Explanation:

The sequence of decisions is reproduced as follows;

1.The trail court ruled in favor of Amex

2. On petition to federal court by the other party, the federal court reversed and overturned the decision of trial court and decided that the clause was not forcible because of the exorbitant cost structure and scenario.

3.U.S Supreme again ruled in favor of Amex where U.S supreme court upheld that Federal Arbitration Act does not allow the judiciary to null and void a contractual relinquishment of the legal rights based merely on the grounds that Italian colors restaurant's dispute resolution costs exceed any potential amounts to be recovered.    

You might be interested in
Must all elements of probable cause exist before a lawful arrest can be made?
kkurt [141]

householdThereWhichever,

Probable cause is a requirement found in the Fourth Amendment that must usually be met before the police make an arrest, conduct a search, or receive a warrant.

“Probable cause” is a legal standard applied to the police and prosecutors; individual citizens don’t “get” probable cause.

Police must demonstrate sufficient probable cause to believe that there is evidence of a crime to obtain a search warrant or an arrest warrant.

Prosecutors must demonstrate sufficient probable cause as to every element of a charged crime to proceed with filing charges and beginning the trial process.

There is no clear legal definition of what constitutes “probable cause” — it’s somewhere between suspicion and proof. The closest you’ll come is the 1949 case Brinegar v. the United States in which the Supreme Court described it thus:

“…where the facts and circumstances within the officers' knowledge, and of which they have reasonably trustworthy information, are sufficient in themselves to warrant a belief by a man of reasonable caution that a crime is being committed.”

Please imagine a situation when someone very healthy falls ill all of a sudden and the reason is not immediately known. You take that person to a doctor and the doctor will ask you to identify the root cause of the illness, generally as under:

type of food the person ate recently

what liquids he/she consumed

whether he/she traveled recently and had food from outside,

whether affected by climate change,

whether any drastic change in his/her daily routine etc.

any other likely change in his/her work schedule

The above list could be the probable causes from which the doctor can identify the root cause for the illness.

II. Similarly, when an inexplicable accident happens(the driver cannot find out the cause), several questions like the following may be asked:

was there break failure

did one of the tires burst

was the driver distracted by someone(suddenly crossing the road etc.)

did the driver doze off(sleep for a while)

The above can be considered as the probable causes, to arrive at the root cause of the accident.

This is cause and this is the effect is a highly scientific approach and it is hardly possible in less than 1% of our day-to-day life despite our 99% dependence on only science-originated things. It is a decision without measurements, proper logic errors, etc., we are forced to land in probability and possibility. Maximum experience is in medical decisions, especially in new upcoming nuisance topics like a corona. Only probable cause is guessed. There is nothing when a patient comes with corona. Whichever is the cause treat him with your best tools as a doctor? Those who work in huge projects of prevention, curtailing, “stop-the-spread” projects will break their heads.

A simple example from a household happening. The jewel kept on a chair just temporarily is missing. 1. Somebody should have kept it safely 2. Somebody should have pocketed it on a non-returnable basis 3. The servants should have taken full benefit of our negligence and we should start searching for what more is stolen 4. The jeweler whom we told that we have some repair work should have come and taken it for repair, we telephone and find out. 5. Government announced gold control when Morarji was P.M. Some excise officer should have read it now, noticed our careless and taken it.

Which out of these is most probable?

Nothing! The jewel was under the cushion of the chair.

Two servants were dismissed forever. There is no excise department connection with that jewel. Nobody can keep it more safely than what the jewel can keep its good self. That jeweler has left the city two years ago.

All guesswork done is included in only probable causes, many cause foolish. Some are probable. But the actual happening has not chosen that. It is the house that has chosen those causes. The scientific or guess ability of the house is clear to them at least.

Probable cause is a guesswork cause that may be or may not be tallying with the truth. The correct guess is 100% probable!

The jewel missing cause is 0% probable!

6 0
2 years ago
A compulsory workers’ compensation law claims that are made when an injury took place on the employer’s premises but did not ari
Lady_Fox [76]

Answer:

false

Explanation:

Accidents and illnesses are part of the injuries mostly covered in the employee compensation claims as result of the exposure of the individual to the work related activities, materials or equipment. The injured employee, in most cases, are required to quickly file for the claims within a stipulated number of days as stated in their employment acts.

However, when the employee gets injured within the premises while he or she engages in other unsafe acts or from another fellow employee, such are not usually covered in the compensation benefits claims.  

7 0
3 years ago
Is it assited s*icide or is it considered murder?
ra1l [238]

Answer:

Murder

Explanation:

No matter what excuse someone may have, or even if the su!cide victim gave the person permission and even confirmed via video-tape or recording, it is still, technically, murder since you were involved in the happening.

4 0
3 years ago
PLZ PLZ PLZ HELP!!!!!!!!
mario62 [17]

Answer:

I would probaly make more systems that they could go do like a rehab center to help that person and to make that person know what he/she did was against the law  

6 0
3 years ago
Which of the following is the term often used by law-enforcement to describe the neighborhood of patrol officers assigned
wlad13 [49]
Answer: we need a,b,c,d to find out




Explanation: didn’t help
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Which of the following is an exception to the hearsay rule?
    9·1 answer
  • True or False: How quickly other drugs reach the bloodstream varies depending upon how the drug is put into the system and the t
    11·1 answer
  • What does it take you to be a police officer or state trooper
    15·1 answer
  • What is the difference between the establishment clause and free exercise clause
    5·2 answers
  • Is it true that the U.S. needs to eliminate its national debt?
    13·2 answers
  • Should hate speech be regulated? (in essay form)
    13·1 answer
  • The elements of driving under the influence
    11·1 answer
  • Why is there no one clear definition for a political conservative
    7·1 answer
  • Citizenship as a right that is materialised through active participation
    14·1 answer
  • Albert built a square chicken coop with 6−foot sides.
    8·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!