"Theory of deviant places" reflects the idea that it is the type of place that makes a difference in crime, more than the kinds of people that live in a certain place.
<u>Answer:</u> Option D
<u>Explanation:</u>
When introduced to risky areas, an individual is more prone to be the victim of a crime. The more often an individual steps into rough neighborhoods where violent crime is normal, the higher the risk of victimization, this whole phenomenon is stated as the deviant place theory.
As per the Merton concept, there may be five forms of deviance focused upon these parameters: creativity, conformity, ritualism, rebellion and retreatism. There are three wide sociological categories, which characterize deviant behavior notably: symbolic interaction, structural functionalism and theory of conflict.
Answer:If you apply for Medigap coverage after your open enrollment period has passed, you may have to go through medical underwriting. The insurer may review your medical history and refuse to sell you a policy, or sell you one at a higher cost, if you do not meet its underwriting requirements.
Explanation:
To impress a judge we respectful and polite and be honest and truthful to yourself a judge can call a bluff, emancipation the fact or process of being set free from legal, social, or political restrictions; liberation.
Answer: B. Notice of termination is made known to parties indirectly related to an agency agreement.
Explanation:
The constructive notice is a legal term that reflects that someone has the knowledge of an event or transaction due to reasonable facts. The notice is kept in the public record. The principle on the basis of the premise that indicates that someone cannot deny the knowledge of the fact because the official duty will inquire about it.
B is the correct option this is because the parties are made aware indirectly about the notice. This can be done by publication of the agreement in the news paper in the area where the agreement exists.
Answer: both of them will have the fault.
Explanation:well, if I were to be the Judge of this case, I will hold both to be at fault. On Sutton's part, she leased the house out and she should have kept it in a good shape. Though the house was not in good shape, Laws had lodge series of complaints concerning the disrepair, which means that Sutton should have had it repaired.
Sutton promised Laws that he was going to repair the stairs, so, I would say, Laws would have assumed that Sutton would have repaired the stairs before he(laws) returned back from his business trip.
However, we should not forget that whenever we assess a situation according to the law there must have been a legal contract but in this case, Laws never entered into a contract with Sutton to make the repairs. Which means that Laws cannot fully blame Sutton. Therefore, i will hold both responsible.
