No, Cobin should have been stay to see the result of the academic misconduct hearing because he has some facts available in this case.
<h3 /><h3>What is the William J Upchurch medal? </h3>
The William J Upchurch medal is a final undergraduate award, which is given annually to the outstanding seniors in the Hopkins college of Business.
The criteria for the award consists overall GPA, GPA in business courses, involvement in student organization etc.
The facts available in this case are: Cobin was attending the orientation session in his junior year, & went to two career fairs in the past two year. He was also a member for two years. He should stay to see the result of the academic hearing.
Learn more about the William J Upchurch medal here:-
brainly.com/question/1413612
#SPJ1
Answer:
d.guarantee the company will earn a profit
Explanation:
Internal controls are controls put in place by management to mitigate against identified risk. Risk basically refers to what could go wring in a process. Controls are put in place to mitigate against the risk of error or fraud and do not necessarily prevent the company from making a loss.
Companies make profit or loss based on management's decisions such as where to invest, what time to invest, introduction of a new product, management of cost of sales and operating expenses etc
Internal controls basically consist of policies and procedures that ensure that the company's asset are not misused (fraud), no misrepresentation of revenue (fraud), employees and managers comply with laws and regulations, business information is accurate ( no misrepresentation of records due to error) etc.
Hence Internal control does not consist of policies and procedures that guarantee the company will earn a profit.
The right option is d.
The court found the employee status because he had and agreement indicating that he was an independent <em>contractor</em>.
<h3>What is an independent contractor?</h3>
It should be noted independent contractors are the contractors that don't work under an employer. They work independently.
In this case, the court found the employee status because he had and agreement indicating that he was an independent contractor.
Learn more about independent contractor on:
brainly.com/question/7429981
#SPJ1
Answer:false
Explanation: idk I only know the answer