Answer: nevermind, ignore me
Based on the given scenario, it can be concluded that a legally binding contract was concluded between X and Y.
This is because, before the agreed date of 20th August, X withdrew her acceptance and sent it by post and also made a call to Y which informed him of her current stance.
<h3>What is a Contract?</h3>
This refers to the legally binding agreement that exists between two or more people about the terms of something.
Hence, we can see that based on the given scenario, it can be concluded that a legally binding contract was concluded between X and Y.
Notwithstanding the arrival of the postal letter of acceptance, this is considered void as there has been a change of terms that have been clearly communicated to the other party.
Read more about contract here:
brainly.com/question/984979
#SPJ1
Answer:
Yes, against Sally only.
Explanation:
With the information given in the question, Ann´s lawsuit will not proceed after Donny´s defendant raise the defenses of limitations.
A statute of limitations looks to set a maximum time after which an event could be legally imported and a lawsuit against it will pass.
A statute of repose limits the time that an action could be brought back because of a particular event.
The bad things that happened to Ann were in 2018 so, for the car accident she had until 2020 to initiate a lawsuit.
On the other hand, the statute of repose began to run once the affected notice the problem that the particular event, in this case, the negligence from Sally, is caused. Ann noticed the pain on her elbow in 2020 so she had until 2030 to initiate a lawsuit.
I hope this answer helps you.
Answer: State Law vs Federal Law
For a very brief explanation, federally the "grass" is illegal. But in some states, it's legal for either recreational and medical use. According to Cornell law, "Federalism is a system of government in which the same territory is controlled by two levels of government. Generally, an overarching national government is responsible for broader governance of larger territorial areas, while the smaller subdivisions, states, and cities govern the issues of local concern." In the case of the "grass" the federal government has the broad rule of outlawing it, but the federal government makes no effort to enforce the federal rule, as the DOJ would not take up the case of simple possession. So it's left up to the states.
Answer:
I can't understand your question please explain
