Answer:
The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case. Five of the nine Justices must vote in order to grant a stay, e.g., a stay of execution in a death penalty case. Under certain instances, one Justice may grant a stay pending review by the entire Court.
Explanation:
The Constitution states that the Supreme Court has both original and appellate jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction means that the Supreme Court is the first, and only, Court to hear a case. The Constitution limits original jurisdiction cases to those involving disputes between the states or disputes arising among ambassadors and other high-ranking ministers. Appellate jurisdiction means that the Court has the authority to review the decisions of lower courts. Most of the cases the Supreme Court hears are appeals from lower courts.
idk if that helps at all, hopefully it helps a little...
Answer:
c. Both of the above are TRUE.
Answer:
Religious freedom is a democratic principle that is well exemplified in the American Constitution, being exhibited in the first constitutional amendment.
Explanation:
One of the main principles seen in democracy is the defense of popular freedom. An example of this can be seen in the first American constitutional amendment, which states that Congress and no governmental sphere can determine a religion to be followed, how to prevent worship and the celebration of any activity of any religion. This gives citizens the power of choice, which is strongly advocated within democratic concepts.
Answer:
Option D
Explanation:
Among the four options given, the correct option based on Model rules is option D
The lawyer would suggest to carry on the case and leave the weapon hidden in a secret place. This would not affect the case as long as this is not opened to anyone and if it had not been disclosed in the case investigation, there are few chances it would be disclosed in near future
Model Rules of Professional Conduct define the behaviours of law professionals when confronted with certain ethical and social issues
A consultant was alleged to be in material breach of a consultancy contract for refusing to supply his services. He responded to a material breach notice by stating that he was willing to perform. However, the Court of Appeal held that this was insufficient to remedy the breach (Bains v Arunvill Capital Limited).(According to the court, actual performance, rather than an indication of a willingness to perform, is required to remedy a material breach of contract.
