Answer:
The farm’s marginal benefits for each piece of land will increase
Explanation:
Answer:
statute of limitations
Explanation:
In simple words, A statue of limitations refers to the legislation enacted by a governing body to specify the permissible period following an incident wherein legal procedures can begin.
After the duration stated under a limitations statute expires, a lawsuit can no more be pursued or, if lodged, can be rejected if the argument against the lawsuit occurs that the petition is duration-barred as being brought beyond the legislative expiration date. If in a civil proceeding a statute of limitations passes, the judiciary have no authority any more.
Answer:
c.) people invested money to produce goods to sell for profit
Explanation:
The Industrial Revolution was a historical process started in England in the 18th century, mainly, being commonly associated with the beginning of the capitalist mode of production. This revolution consisted primarily in the development of new techniques for the production of goods, with a new technology, and in a new form of social division of labor. At that time, companies were aiming at increasing profits, through the uninterrupted manufacture of goods. At that time, businessmen invested in new goods and technologies in the constant search for profit and capital accumulation, which manifests itself in the form of goods and money.
Answer:
a. revolutionary movement
Explanation:
Revolutionary movement -
It is the type of movement which lead to a huge revolution , is known as revolutionary movement .
A revolutionary movement require many small changes , which will atlast lead to a huge movement , and take over the control of the state .
In a slow pace , the small and major movements , become revolutionary .
Same is the case given in the question ,
Therefore , the correct term from the given options is a. revolutionary movement .
Answer:
True
Explanation:
In the Daubert case, The case is tainted because the defendant provided 'expert witness' to give testimony in the favor, but the testimonies that given contradict the common scientific knowledge that is held by scientific community. Even though this happen, the juries still rule in favor of the defendant simply because they brought 'an expert'.
To prevent this from happening again, the supreme court created rule 702 which restrict the type of expert testimonies that are admissible in court.
