Criminal, civil and bankruptcy cases
now i can’t answer how they rule, sorry
It is a false statement that the curfew is an unfair limit on their persoanl rights granted by the amendment in the Bill of Rights.
<h3>What is the Bill of Rights?</h3>
This is an first amendment that establish citizen right & liberties from the government authorities.
The right ranges from right to speech, religion, privacy, press, assembly, petition, trial by jury etc.
However, the curfew imposed on the citizen is not an unfair limit on their personal rights because it is intended to protect them from an unseen danger that can occur at night.
Missing words " Residents say it is an unfair limit on their rights. Discuss your position on the issue and include an explanation of how it relates to an amendment in the Bill of Rights.:
Read more about Bill of Rights
<em>brainly.com/question/493206</em>
#SPJ1
Answer:
Keisha has the right to be tried in New York under the Sixth Amendment: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed[.]”
Explanation:
Answer:
The major premise is lack of House to pay attention towards the road ahead of him and the rule of contributory negligence. By using this jurisdiction, the plaintiff's damages will be reduced.
Explanation:
- The defendant driver, while he may ultimately be liable if all of the witnesses say he ran the stop sign, will raise the comparative fault of House for failing to keep a proper lookout and failing to take evasive action to avoid a collision.
- The defenses are the same as they would be if the collision was with another car instead of a bicycle.
- House had an ordinary duty to pay attention to the road ahead of him and keep himself and others safe.
- By watching his books and not the traffic, he breached that duty.
- I'm not saying that defense will be successful, but that's what would be alleged by the car's driver as a defense.
- In most states, the damages to the plaintiff will be reduced by the percentage of his/her comparative fault (also known in some jurisdictions as contributory negligence).
- In some states, if the plaintiff's comparative fault is shown to be over 50%, there will be no recovery at all.
