QUESTION 7

1 answer:

8 0

If the president opposes the bill, he can veto it and return the bill to Congress with a veto message suggesting changes unless the Congress is out of session then the president may rely on a pocket veto. ... Congress may override vetoes with a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate.

Explanation:

You might be interested in

dangerous activities, like drinking and driving, only pose a threat to one individual - the one performing the unsafe dead.

Galina-37 [17]

Answer:

False.

Explanation:

I think this is a true/false question, so the answer should be false

5 0

2 years ago

What factor should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation?

devlian [24]

The factor should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that

The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed.

For better understanding let's explain what tort interference means

There are two types of tortious interference

Tortious interference with contract
Tortious interference with good economic advantage.

Tort interference is regarded as an issue where one party was involved in something or does a thing to intentionally disregard another party’s business transactions or project

From the above we can therefore say that the answer the factors should a plaintiff consider when deciding which interference tort applies to a situation is that:

The plaintiff must a contract that is with a third party;
The defendant must know about the contract at the time of the alleged interference
The defendant must have interfered intentionallly and the interference was not right
The actions of defendant’s led to a breach of the contract
The plaintiff has suffered some measure of damage as a result
The defendant knew a contract between the plaintiff and a third party existed is correct