1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Molodets [167]
2 years ago
12

Moving to the next question prevents changes to this answer

Law
1 answer:
Marysya12 [62]2 years ago
6 0
The correct answer is A!

Must be a United States Citizen

This answer is correct because none of the other ones are the requirements for this.

Hope this helps!
You might be interested in
What do only city and county (that towns do not) governments have?
AveGali [126]

Answer:

In United States local government,a consolidated city-county is a city and county that have been merged into one unified jurisdiction.As such it is simultaneously a city,which is a municipal corporation,and a county,which is an administrative division of a state.It has the powers and responsibilities of both types of entities.

6 0
3 years ago
A John Hopkins study showed that the states with the strictest graduated licensing requirements have a 20% decrease in teen fata
poizon [28]
The answer is A true
5 0
3 years ago
Give your own example of the 5th Amendment.
Verdich [7]

Answer: say if u were going to court and ur were being prosucuted and u felt like there making u say something ur nor trying to say u can ask for an attorney

Explanation:

The Fifth Amendment creates a number of rights relevant to both criminal and civil legal proceedings.

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which of these actions is most likely to be permitted in dealing with a person with limited English proficiency?
djyliett [7]

Answer: allowing a child to interpret in an emergency

Explanation:

Under the ACA Section 1557, we should note that there should not be any form of discrimination against anyone simply because such person cannot speak English.

Therefore, in a scenario whereby there is someone with limited English proficiency, the most likely to action to be allowed is to allow a child to interpret in the case of an emergency.

6 0
3 years ago
WILL MARK BRAINLIEST!!! 100 POINTS!!! For this project, you have the opportunity to be the author and write brief newspaper arti
LUCKY_DIMON [66]

Answer:

Manufacturers are used to defending strict product liability actions when plaintiffs claim that their products are defective. But in the opioid litigation, plaintiffs have filed something else: more than 2,500 public nuisance cases so far.

Governmental entities across the country are filing suits alleging that opioid manufacturers deceptively marketed their legal, opioid-based pain medications to understate the medication’s addictive qualities and to overstate its effectiveness in treating pain. In addition, plaintiffs allege that opioid distributors failed to properly monitor how frequently the medication was prescribed and failed to stop filling prescription orders from known “pill mills.” The complaints claim that manufacturer defendants’ deceptive marketing schemes and distributor defendants’ failure to monitor led more people to become addicted to painkillers, which led to people turning to illegal opioids. The legal argument here is that the defendants’ actions in concert interfered with an alleged public right against unwarranted illness and addition. But is public nuisance law likely to be a successful avenue for prosecuting these types of mass tort claims? It has not been in the past.

This is the first of two posts that will address how plaintiffs have historically used public nuisance law to prosecute mass tort claims and how the plaintiffs in the current opioid litigation may fare.

Overview of Public Nuisance Law

In most states, a public nuisance is “an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public.”[1] This definition is often broken down into four elements: (1) the defendant’s affirmative conduct caused (2) an unreasonable interference (3) with a right common to the general public (4) that is abatable.

Courts have interpreted these elements in different ways. For example, courts in Rhode Island and California have disagreed about when a public nuisance is abatable: the Rhode Island Supreme Court held that this element is satisfied only if the defendant had control over what caused the nuisance when the injury occurred, while the a California Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff need not prove this element at all.[2] And while the federal district court in Ohio handling the opioid multidistrict litigation (MDL) has held that the right to be free from unwarranted addiction is a public right,[3] the Supreme Court of Illinois held that the right to be “free from unreasonable jeopardy to health” is a private right and cannot be the basis of a public nuisance claim.[4]

Roots of Public Nuisance Law in Mass Tort Cases

Plaintiffs litigating mass tort cases have turned to public nuisance law over the past decades. In the 1980s and 1990s, plaintiffs unsuccessfully attempted to use it to hold asbestos manufacturers liable.[5] In one case, plaintiffs alleged that defendants created a nuisance by producing an asbestos-laced product that caused major health repercussions for a portion of the population. Plaintiffs argued that North Dakota nuisance law did not require defendants to have the asbestos-laced products within their control when the injury to the consumer occurred. Explicitly rejecting this theory, the Eighth Circuit held that North Dakota nuisance law required the defendant to have control over the product and found that defendant in the case before it did not have control over the asbestos-laced products because when the injury occurred, the products had already been distributed to consumers. The Eighth Circuit warned that broadening nuisance law to encompass these claims “would in effect totally rewrite” tort law, morphing nuisance law into “a monster that would devour in one gulp the entire law of tort.”[6]

3 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • Susan bought a home with a sale price of $235,000. She put down 20%, and obtained a loan for the balance. Her interest rate was
    14·1 answer
  • What are the roles of the Judicial component in the criminal justice system
    7·1 answer
  • At least three physical properties for each piece of evidence. For pieces of evidence that are in the form of a representation,
    15·1 answer
  • The difference between unlimited wants and limited resources affects both individuals and the economy.
    13·2 answers
  • What is the effect of a consent decree? a. The agency's charges are dismissed with no sanctions. b. The party makes no admission
    12·1 answer
  • (DO NOT GIVE FALSE ANSWERS)
    7·2 answers
  • According to California law leaving her children ——-of age or younger attended in the vehicle is illegal
    12·1 answer
  • State law of gravitational force
    6·1 answer
  • 10 points
    9·2 answers
  • When he was hired, Javon was told he would get a 4%
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!