Clear and present danger test, says speech may be restricted if evidence exists that such expression would endanger the public.
<h3>What is a clear and present danger test?</h3>
The clear and present danger test stressed that
printed or spoken word may not be the subject of previous restraint.
Unless there is a danger created by that expression, this test was originated in Schenck v. the United States.
Learn more about clear and present danger test at;
brainly.com/question/24452126
The correct answer is C; It is improper for Joe to assume these responsibilities as he may not sign documents using Dan's name.
Further Explanation:
Joe can't sign the attorneys name on any legal questions or documents on the titles. This is unethical as this is forgery since he isn't signing his own name. If Joe does sign off with the attorneys signature and the search was not correct then the attorney, Sally, and Joe will all be in legal trouble.
The attorney will have to review Sally's work and sign off on it. Since Joe is an attorney, he could actually sign his own name to these papers if it is within his job description and there would be no issues.
Learn more about paralegals at brainly.com/question/1878109
#LearnwithBrainly
Answer:
I believe the answer to 1. is B, and Grare decisis means substantially the same. Basically based on a court's previous decision in a case, that same decision can be carried out and used in any future cases.
Explanation:
Answer:
i think it is b if i am right please mark me brainliest
Explanation:
I believe the answer is wear steel toe shoes whenever handling drug material. I am not 100% sure though.
