I think the summary judgement would be inappropriate in this case
Summary judgement is entered by the court if the plaintiff does not have sufficient evidence that the defendants actually do what they're accused of before moving to trial.
On this case, There is a strong proof that peoples restaurant is aware of Hoag's alcoholism : <u>intoxicated</u>
This mean that sabo can proof that the bar know hoag is an alcoholic and had served enough amount to hoag to get him intoxicated.
This mean that Sabo's case is strong enough to be brought to the trial. keep in mind that Sabo is unlikely to win the trial since the restaurant does not directly involved in the accident. but we can definitely say that summary judgement would be inappropriate in this case.
The water was smother than silk.
Answer: Partisan voting is the most effective and the most common in Congress. There are 535 congressmen and no one congressman can get anything done by himself. It is only through working with one's party that a senator or house member can get legislation passed.
I believe the answer is: leading causes of death, years of potential life lost, economic cost to society
Leading cause of death gives some clue for the administrators to identify the core of the problem. Both years of potential life lost and economic cost is used as factors of consideration to determine whether the financial allocation that they made for prevention and control is proportionate to the financial benefit that might occurs in the future.
