Answer:
Yes he may prevail
Explanation:
He wants to exercise his civic duty and he has every right to file a suit because he has been taxes indirectly to the city.
Firstly, The farmer does not pay any tax directly to the city because a portion of his farm property is turned over by the county to the city to support the city police department, which indirectly, he is paying tax because this support to the city is categorized indirectly as his tax.
Secondly, His farm property has been vandalized several times over the months and the police didn't do anything about it to improve his situation which calls for attention to why nothing has been done about it despite his support to the city police department.
With the two above paragraphs, he has a point and his also lives in one of the rural communities and the city ordinance provides that only residents of the city may vote, but the city ordinance is always the city ordinance, the law might and might not favor him, he could get payment for the damages on his properties, but it would be quite difficult for him to prevail over the suit because he doesn't live in the city
<u>Answer:
</u>
When the psychologist elaborated on how productivity in that particular case has nothing to do with ratings, the interviewer interpreted it in a wrong manner and put it up as good researchers cannot make good teachers.
<u>Explanation:
</u>
- The meaning of what the psychologist said was not taken as it is by the interviewer and was rather twisted due to confusion.
- The interviewer interpreted exactly the opposite of what the psychologist said because he could not understand the use of words made by the psychologist in a different manner.
