Evidence testing because you get all of the background information and you get to be hands on with the crime.
Answer:
A contract is an agreement between at least two natural or legal persons – the parties, or more specifically contractors – about what they will do with each other or for each other – the performance to be delivered – or not.
Contracts must be distinguished from obligations: an agreement creates an obligation, but the reverse is not always the case. If someone inflicts damage on another, this may result in an obligation to compensate it.
Sometimes a contract has a predetermined term, the period for which it applies. These must in principle be fulfilled. If the other party does not fulfill an agreement, it can, if necessary, be enforced through the courts.
Answer:
Market share liability
Explanation:
To understand the doctrine of market share liability, it is important to first know the meaning of market share itself.
Market share refers to the percentage of the overall sales of a particular industry that is generated by a company. It calculated by dividing the total sales of the firm during a specified period by the aggregate sales of the industry during the same period. This gives an idea what the size of a company is compared with its competitors in the industry.
From the question, market share of BDC for that drug i Ohio is believed to be 40% when the mother of the plaintiff was taking it.
Market share liability is a legal doctrine unique to the law of the U.S. which gives an opportunity to a plaintiff who sustained an injury from a fungible product to establish a prima facie case against the product based on the market share of the manufacturers of that product, regardless of whether or not knows the actual producer of the product.
Therefore, the state of the plaintiff follows the doctrine of market share liability if he is able to collect $40,000 which from BDC out of the $100,000.
Note:
The $40,000 is obtained after applying 40% market share of BDC to the $100,000 total damages.
I wish you the best.
Answer:
The Court upheld the statute only in the case of states that could provide matching funds; and if matching funds could not be provided.
Explanation:
The case was resolved 7-2 with the majority vote wrote by the Chief Justice William Rehnquist. It stated that the statue was a valid interpretation of the Spending Clause and that it was not unconstitutional. Congress has the authority of regulating the spends but not till the point they applied coercion.
I hope this answer helps you.
Answer:
a. political and legal systems
b. sources of capital
d. inflation
e. taxation
Explanation:
GAAP stands for general accounting principles accepted throughout the United States. Being a system completely necessary to promote national investors, economic resources, support of government financial decisions, maintenance of economic records and optimization of commercial performance. US GAAAP differs from international GAAAP, but this difference is the result of several factors such as political and legal systems, sources of capital, business complexity, inflation, taxation, cultural issues and even historical events.
