Answer:
Yes he may prevail
Explanation:
He wants to exercise his civic duty and he has every right to file a suit because he has been taxes indirectly to the city.
Firstly, The farmer does not pay any tax directly to the city because a portion of his farm property is turned over by the county to the city to support the city police department, which indirectly, he is paying tax because this support to the city is categorized indirectly as his tax.
Secondly, His farm property has been vandalized several times over the months and the police didn't do anything about it to improve his situation which calls for attention to why nothing has been done about it despite his support to the city police department.
With the two above paragraphs, he has a point and his also lives in one of the rural communities and the city ordinance provides that only residents of the city may vote, but the city ordinance is always the city ordinance, the law might and might not favor him, he could get payment for the damages on his properties, but it would be quite difficult for him to prevail over the suit because he doesn't live in the city
The main reason for the controversy surrounding sentencing decisions in America is that its citizen often disagree with the goals of imprisonment.
Basically, a sentencing decision refers to verdicts made by court judge and the options may includes the following:
- incarceration
- fine
- restitution
- compensation
- probation etc
However, the main reason for the controversy surrounding sentencing decisions in America is that its citizen often disagree with the goals of imprisonment.
Therefore, the Option A is correct.
Read more about imprisonment:
<em>brainly.com/question/12408734</em>
Answer:
The correct answer is C. Xander has not yet attained object permanence.
Explanation:
According to Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development, object permanence occurs during the <em>Sensorimotor Stage (birth- 2 years old)</em>, in which an infant understands that an <em>object is still there even if it cannot be seen. </em>
In this case, Xander has not yet obtained object permanence since as soon as the rattle is taken away, for him it has <em>ceased to exist</em>, thus making him be interested in other stimulus.
Answer:
Kyle will not collect any damages since he did not sustain any damages.
Explanation:
As Kyle did not have any negative health effects from the incident he suffered in the restaurant, there are low chances that he will perceive any money from suing the restaurant for negligence. There is no evidence to prove that the place committed an act of negligence.