Answer from Chapter 5 Civil Law and Procedure
liability for statements made during the actual trial or hearing. Similarly, liability for defamatory statements about public officials or prominent personalities does not exist unless the statements were made with malice. That means the statement when issued was known to be false or was made with a reckless disregard for its probable falsehood. Invasion of Privacy People are entitled to keep personal matters private. This is the right to privacy. Congress has stated that the right of privacy is a personal and fundamental right protected by the Constitution of the United States. Invasion of privacy is a tort defined as the uninvited intrusion into an individual s personal relationships and activities in a way likely to cause shame or mental suffering in an ordinary person. An invasion of privacy also can result from unnecessary publicity regarding personal matters. So, unlike the law regarding the tort of defamation, publication of even a true statement about someone may be an invasion of privacy. This is because, as the U.S. Supreme Court put it, you should be protected when you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus, two-way mirrors result of the slanderous remark. Exceptions to this occur in cases where the oral statements are to the effect that the plaintiff committed a serious crime, has a loathsome disease, or injures someone in his or her profession or business. In libel cases, you are presumed to have suffered a loss, and so these damages do not have to be shown to the court. Exceptions are made to the law of defamation in order to encourage open discussion of issues of public concern. For example, legislators statements, even those made with malice, are immune from liability if made during legislative meetings. Judges, lawyers, jurors, witnesses, and other parties in judicial proceedings are also immune from What are some situations related to the right to privacy that affect your life? BLEND IMAGES 5-2 Intentional Torts, Negligence, and Strict Liability 87
Answer: True
Explanation: The separation of powers among three independent branches of government is a defining characteristic of the presidential system that characterizes the institutions of some constitutional democracies, such as Argentina, Brazil, Panama, the Philippines, and the United States of America. The U.S. Constitution is the original functional model for separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government.
Answer:
The distinction between ordinary and privilege mitigating circumstances are: (a) Under the rules for application of divisible penalties (Article 64 of the Revised Penal Code), the presence of a mitigating circumstance, has the effect of applying the divisible penalty in its minimum period. Under the rules on graduation of penalty (Articles 68 and 69), the presence of privileged mitigating circumstance has the effect of reducing the penalty one or two degrees lower. (b) Ordinary mitigating circumstances can be off-set by the aggravating circumstances. Privileged mitigating circumstances are not subject to the off-set rule
Answer:
a) The parties to the contract know too much about their particular interests and as a result, the terms of the contract are not necessarily fair.
Explanation:
13 because the 13 colonies wrote it