. . . requiring the officer of the passenger train to assign each passenger to the coach or compartment assigned for the race to
which he or she belong; and imposing fines or imprisonment upon passengers insisting on going into a coach or compartment other than the one set aide for the race to which he or she belongs. How does the excerpt relate to the premises of Brown v. Board of Education?
<h3>The Brown v Board of Education case addresses whether public institutions can legally be divided by race.
</h3>
Explanation:
The Brown v School of Education was a landmark case regarding public school segregation on the basis of race.
Thurgood Marshall was the chief attorney for the plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education. The plaintiff attorney ruled out that segregation policy violated the provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
The case won an unanimous verdict against school segregation.
After the case was won, the Supreme Court outlawed the practice of segregation in any public institutions.
Answer:lose because Kelly had no legal duty to rescue him
Explanation:Legal duty will mean that Kelly is in a position in which she is obligated by law to help Bob, which in this case there is no legal obligation over Kelly to help Bob.
they choose to handle things in a manner that is more beneficial. without an organized approach there would be complete chaos. having this system we are able to deal with differences in a more civilized manner. that's how its intended.
