Answer:
The correct answer is Land contracts or Contracts for deed.
Explanation:
Land contracts or contracts for deed were a type of contract with easy accessibility and good financing conditions than those offered by institutional lenders between 1970 and 1980.
When these lenders began to lower the necessary requirements to grant loans and mortgage rates declined, these types of contracts were disappearing although they did not completely.
When people had difficulties with banks to ask for loans or mortgages, then they went to these contracts that were much more accessible.
The way it works is as follows:
An agreement is established between a Vendor and a Vendee, where the Vendor agrees to sell a property by financing the purchase for the Vendee.
The Vendor keeps the legal title and gives the Vendee the equitable title.
Financing is offered to Vendee.
Once the payment is completed, the seller will receive a deed of ownership.
Answer:
okokokokokokokokokokokokok
Explanation:
yes
23. B
24. A - party chief
25. D
26. A
27. C
28. E
Answer: with Civil cases Its hard to tell..
Explanation:
Most civil cases are settled by mutual agreement between the parties. A dispute can be settled even before a suit is filed. Once a suit is filed, it can be settled before the trial begins, during the trial, while the jury is deliberating, or even after a verdict is rendered. ... However, not every case goes to trial. Therefore It's no secret that the overwhelming majority of criminal cases never reach trial. The prosecution may dismiss charges, perhaps because of a lack of evidence. Sometimes prosecutors decide not to refile charges after a felony defendant prevails at the preliminary hearing. Also The trial judge can "direct" a verdict for the defendant in a jury trial or dismiss in a case tried by the judge. Procedural defects in a lawsuit often involve the wrong court or location (venue) or that the court has no authority, or jurisdiction, over the defendant. And that Is why many civil cases end up with a settlement before the case goes to trial.
Answer: No, because a dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction is not on the merits.
Explanation:
Following the information given in the question, it should be noted that the case should not be dismissed by the court due to the fact that the dismissal is based on the lack of personal jurisdiction.
It should be noted that the claim preclusion should be added to the answer of the defendant as it's an affirmative defense and it requires more than the claimant bringing a case against the same defendant.
