"Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886), was the first case where the United States Supreme Court ruled that a law that is race-neutral on its face, but is administered in a prejudicial manner, is an infringement of the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Hello,
Upon reading, it seems the question is asking what the charge would be, in this case it would have to be C, civil court as breach of contract. The plaintiff didn't abide by the contract(if there was one), and the charges are his defense against the breach of contract charge. He was there to do a job and never completed it. The only problem with this is, we do not know if the plaintiff signed a contract with the defendant or not. [ If he did then it all depends on what the contract said and if he met those goals.] Most likely however this would appear in a civil court as a breach of contract.
Answer:
The Platt Amendment explained the following: 1. Cuba could not make any treaty with another nation that would weaken its independence or allow another foreign power to gain territory in Cuba. 2. Cuba had to allow the US to buy or lease naval stations in Cuba. 3.
Explanation:
The main thing is because Britain possessed the factories and other key factors of production. The agricultural and rural societies were transformed into urban and before the Industrial revolution the manufacturing was done in people's home and after that it was largely done in factories and the products were mass produced.
