Answer:
no
Explanation:
The judgment of the trial court is correct that plaintiffs cannot recover against Gary and Joan Doerhoff on the theory pursued.
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.
Answer:
Preliminary hearing.
Explanation:
A preliminary hearing in criminal litigation is commonly referred to as a prelim and is the legal process of a "trial before the trial" of an accused or the defendant.
This simply means that, at the preliminary hearing, the judge using the "probable cause" legal standard, decides whether there is enough evidence to warrant the defendant to stand trial but not to determine whether he or she is guilty or innocent of the crime. Thus, no jury is present or required at this phase of trial because the defendant isn't entitled to any at the preliminary hearing.
Additionally, during the preliminary hearing phase of a trial, evidence is given in the attempt to convince the judge that there is enough evidence to go to trial. A prosecutor on behalf of the government may call witnesses to testify against the defendant and even present physical evidence to the judge, so that the case may go to trial while the defense counsel will work towards having the case dismissed by cross examining the government witnesses and disputing any evidence presented.
