The power is in the hands of the people and representatives they elect
Answer: Yes. The motel within its rights to refuse her admittance
Explanation:
From the question, we are informed that Manpreet reserved a room at the Moonlight Motel but couldn't later travel and therefore called her sister, Ravinder, to make use of the motel room in her place.
We are further told that Ravinder was refused admittance to the room on the grounds that there was a waiting list and she was not on it.
Based on the nice scenario, the motel was within its rights to refuse her admittance. It should be noted that the hotel room wasn't booked in her name but rather booked in Manpreet's name. The thing that Manpreet could have done is to inform the motel when she realize that she couldn't come and change the terms of the contract by saying her sister will be coming. But in this scenario, the motel is within its rights to refuse her admittance.
Answer:
Hsu was indicted for violating the Economic Espio- nage Act by conspiring to steal corporate trade secrets for an anti-cancer drug. The defense requested a copy of the trade secret documents. The government contended that the defense did not need access to the documents except under supervision of the judge. The defense maintained a right of full access to the documents so the defense of impossibil- ity could be established, meaning Hsu could not steal trade secrets that did not exist. District court agreed with the defense; government appealed. Must the defendant be allowed full access to trade secrets that are a key part of a case? [U.S. v. Hsu, 155 F. 3d 189, 3rd Cir. (1998)]
Explanation:
Answer:
IT DONT SHOW KNOW QUESTION
Explanation:
Answer:
Arizona v. Gant
Explanation:
Arizona v. Gant (2009), was a USA Supreme Court choice stating that the 4th Amendment to the USA Constitution requires law implementation officials to exhibit a real and proceeding with danger to their wellbeing presented by an arrestee, or a need to protect proof identified with the wrongdoing of capture from altering by the arrestee, so as to legitimize a warrantless vehicular pursuit episode to capture directed after the vehicle's ongoing tenants have been captured and made sure about.
