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
MrRissso [65]
3 years ago
5

If Gloria threw a rock that hit Merle, she is liable for an intentional tort of battery only if she intended to injure or harm M

erle.
Law
2 answers:
Thepotemich [5.8K]3 years ago
6 0
is this geography im confused
masya89 [10]3 years ago
6 0
She is liable for battery
You might be interested in
What did Oliver Wendal Holmes say limits free speech​
Mariana [72]
Answer: Holmes wrote: The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.
Found: google
4 0
3 years ago
Which of the following statements BEST supports the belief that a
yaroslaw [1]
Defense is responsible for proving a person’s innocence

Brainliest?
8 0
3 years ago
Does racial background affects someone’s ability to recognize someone of different race
iragen [17]

Answer: i don't think so

Explanation:

because if your a different color so what we are all human  

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
PLEASE HELP ME :<
nlexa [21]

Answer:

bro chillll and eat asss

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Hazirah has lent her money amounting to RM30,000 to her classmate, Intan. Intan has promised to pay her debt to Hazirah. Johan,
gulaghasi [49]

Hazirah can legally claim the remaining balance of Intan's debt because there was no acceptance of the offer from Johan that the part-payment should serve as full settlement.

<h3>What is the law of contract?</h3>

The law of contract deals with the enforcement of promises when certain elements are present. These contract elements include offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention.

Intan should remember that a valid and enforceable contract has conditions.  We cannot claim there is an implied acceptance of Johan's offer.  Johan cannot modify the contract terms between Intan and Hazirah because he was not a party to the contract.

Lastly, Johan did not offer any consideration for Hazirah to forfeit the balance of RM5,000.  And Hazirah remained silent during Johan's informal negotiations without communicating her acceptance.

Thus, there was <u>no </u><u>contract</u><u> </u>between Johan and Hazirah, and Intan should do well to repay the balance.

Learn more  about the elements of a contract at brainly.com/question/8116487

7 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • At which stage of a case proceeding does a court acquire in personam jurisdiction over a defendant?
    14·1 answer
  • New adaptations first come about by
    5·1 answer
  • Most standard risks derive from?
    12·1 answer
  • Psychological abuse is associated with more developmental impairments than if the child were physically maltreated
    7·2 answers
  • How are judicial activism and judicial review related?
    10·2 answers
  • In 2014 the number of homicides was what percent of the total number of crimes reported
    15·1 answer
  • Note-taking is important because they may be referred to again before a trial sometimes months or years after
    14·1 answer
  • Mea 9884 gpiusysvme its a word scramble
    8·1 answer
  • A market economy is a system in which supply and demand regulate the economy, rather than the government. Some characteristics a
    13·1 answer
  • What legal burden(s) do the People have during a NYS criminal prosecution, if any?
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!