The event that would not terminate an agency by operation of law is the principal breaching his or her duty to reimburse the agent. The correct answer is option a.
This would require some action or decision by one of the parties involved rather than being an automatic termination by operation of law. The other events listed (agent death, principal death, purpose becoming illegal) would all terminate the agency by operation of law.
It can, however, give the agent the right to sue the principal for damages. The other events mentioned in the question would terminate the agency by operation of law. The death of the agent or principal terminates the agency because the agent's authority to act on behalf of the principal ends upon the agent's or principal's death. The purpose of the agency becoming illegal also terminates the agency because it makes the agency impossible to perform.
Another way an agency can be terminated by operation of law is if the purpose of the agency becomes illegal. If the purpose of the agency becomes illegal, then the agency can no longer be performed and is terminated by operation of law. For example, if an agent is authorized to sell illegal drugs on behalf of a principal, the agency becomes illegal and is terminated by operation of law.
However, if the principal breaches his or her duty to reimburse the agent, the breach of duty to reimburse by the principal is a breach of the contract of the agency, but it does not terminate the agency by operation of law. The agency relationship still exists, but the agent may have the right to sue the principal for damages.
Therefore option a is correct.
To know more about Operation of Law- https://brainly.com/question/820417
#SPJ11
the process of determining the appropriateness of jurors to sit on the jury is known as
The process of determining the appropriateness of jurors to sit on the jury is known as jury selection or voir dire.
During jury selection, potential jurors are questioned by the judge or attorneys to determine if they are suitable to serve on the jury for a particular case.
The purpose of the questioning is to identify any biases or prejudices that may affect a juror's ability to be impartial in the case. Jurors may be excused if they have a personal connection to the case, if they have formed an opinion about the case, or if they have any other factors that may affect their ability to be unbiased.
The goal of jury selection is to select a jury that will be fair and impartial in deciding the outcome of the case. It is an important part of the legal process and helps to ensure that justice is served.
to learn more about voir dire click here:
brainly.com/question/30478145
#SPJ11
which cybercriminal activity refers to the act of luring internet users to bogus web sites?
The cybercriminal activity that refers to the act of luring internet users to bogus web sites is known as "phishing."
Phishing is a type of online scam that typically involves sending fraudulent emails or messages with the intention of tricking people into providing sensitive information such as login credentials, credit card details, or other personal information.
These emails often appear to be from a legitimate source, such as a bank or popular e-commerce site, and may contain links to fake websites that closely resemble the real thing.
Once the user enters their information on the bogus site, the cybercriminals can use it to steal their identity, make unauthorized purchases, or engage in other fraudulent activities. Phishing is a common form of cybercrime that can be difficult to detect and prevent, making it important for individuals to stay vigilant and take steps to protect their personal information online.
to learn more about phishing click here:
brainly.com/question/24156548
#SPJ11
when a corporation accepts legal responsibility for a contract, it is called novation. T/F
True. Novation is a legal term used to describe the process by which one party transfers all obligations and rights of a contract to a third party.
This transfer occurs with the consent of all parties involved and the original contracting party is released from any further obligation or liability. Therefore, when a corporation accepts legal responsibility for a contract through novation, it means that the corporation has assumed all rights and obligations of the original contracting party. Hence, the statement "when a corporation accepts legal responsibility for a contract, it is called novation" is true.
A novation is when one party in a contract is replaced by a new party, and the original party is released from any obligations under the contract. When a corporation accepts legal responsibility for a contract, it is not called novation, as no party is being replaced or released from their obligations.
Learn more about Novation: https://brainly.com/question/29107733
#SPJ11
In Texas, third party candidates must receive what percentage of the vote to get on the ballot?
a. Six percent
b. Ten percent
c. Five percent
d. Twenty percent
The correct option is C, In Texas, third-party candidates must receive at least 5% of the vote in a statewide election in order to qualify for placement on the ballot for the next election cycle.
Texas is a state located in the southern region of the United States. It is the second-largest state in terms of both land area and population. The state is known for its unique history, diverse culture, and vast landscapes. Texas was once a part of Mexico before gaining independence in 1836 and joining the United States in 1845. The state played a significant role in the Civil War and was also a major center for the oil industry in the early 20th century.
Today, Texas is home to several major cities, including Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio. The state's economy is driven by a variety of industries, including energy, technology, healthcare, and agriculture. Texas is also known for its rich culture, which includes Tex-Mex cuisine, country music, and rodeos. The state is also home to several natural wonders, such as Big Bend National Park and the Guadalupe Mountains.
To know more about Texas refer to-
brainly.com/question/29874906
#SPJ4
for purposes of general contract law (common law), an offer must:
For purposes of general contract law, an offer must meet certain requirements in order to be valid.
First, the offer must be definite and certain, meaning that the terms and conditions of the offer must be clear and unambiguous. The offer must also be communicated to the offeree, either directly or indirectly through a third party. Additionally, the offer must be made with the intent to create a legal obligation and must not be mere puffery or an invitation to negotiate. Finally, the offer must be capable of acceptance, meaning that it must not be impossible or unlawful to perform. If an offer meets these requirements, it may be considered a valid offer and may be accepted by the offeree to form a binding contract.
To learn more about contract law, visit:
https://brainly.com/question/29630716
#SPJ11
Were there other jurors that experience similar feelings of a regret and remorse like Lou? What potential solution was mentioned that would allow the jurors to better cope with their duty?
Answer:
(If you like this answer i would appreciate if u give brainliest but otherwise, i hope this helped ^^)
Explanation:
Based on the given information, there is no mention of other jurors experiencing similar feelings of regret and remorse like Lou. Therefore, it is unclear whether other jurors felt the same way.
As for potential solutions to help jurors cope with their duty, the passage does not explicitly mention any specific solutions. However, some general approaches that could help jurors better cope with their duty include:
Access to Counseling or Support: Providing jurors with access to counseling services or support groups where they can discuss their experiences and emotions related to the trial could be beneficial.
Debriefing Sessions: Conducting debriefing sessions after the trial, where jurors can openly discuss their thoughts and feelings about the case, can help them process their emotions and provide a supportive environment.
Education and Training: Offering education and training programs for jurors on the psychological and emotional aspects of jury duty could better prepare them for the potential emotional challenges they may face during and after a trial.
It is important to note that the specific solutions mentioned above may vary depending on the jurisdiction and the resources available for supporting jurors' well-being.
the children's online privacy protection act in the united states enforces laws for what reason?
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) is a law in the United States that enforces regulations to protect the online privacy of children under the age of 13.
The goal of COPPA is to prevent the online collection, use, or disclosure of children's personal information without their parents' or guardians' permission.
The law stipulates certain privacy safeguards that websites and online services must follow when they are geared toward minors or deliberately collect personal information from them.
These measures include notifying parents and obtaining verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information.
To safeguard the privacy, security, and accuracy of the personal data they gather, operators must follow appropriate data security procedures, according to COPPA.
The purpose of COPPA is to empower parents to make knowledgeable decisions about their children's online activities by promoting transparency and accountability in the collection and use of children's personal information online.
To know more about Privacy,
https://brainly.com/question/30240651
#SPJ1
a utilitarian would necessarily be opposed to the restorative justice approach to criminal justice. T/F
False. A utilitarian may not necessarily be opposed to the restorative justice approach to criminal justice.
A utilitarian is concerned with maximizing overall happiness and minimizing overall suffering. Restorative justice, which focuses on repairing harm and restoring relationships between the offender and the victim, may not necessarily conflict with this goal. In fact, some utilitarians may argue that restorative justice can lead to greater happiness and less suffering in society by reducing recidivism rates and promoting rehabilitation. Therefore, a utilitarian may not necessarily be opposed to the restorative justice approach to criminal justice.
In fact, utilitarianism often supports measures that maximize overall happiness and reduce suffering. Restorative justice, which focuses on repairing harm and addressing the needs of all parties involved, can align with utilitarian principles if it leads to better outcomes for individuals and society as a whole.
Learn more about utilitarian: https://brainly.com/question/28290423
#SPJ11
which ethical system contends that punishment should be consistent with the veil of ignorance?
The ethical system that contends that punishment should be consistent with the veil of ignorance is known as the "original position" within the theory of justice.
This theory, developed by philosopher John Rawls, posits that a just society must be built on principles that would be agreed upon by individuals who are ignorant of their own position and characteristics within society. In this hypothetical scenario, individuals would choose principles of justice that are fair and impartial, leading to the conclusion that punishment must be consistent with these principles. Punishment that is consistent with the veil of ignorance means that it is fair, consistent, and impartial, and that it is not influenced by factors such as race, gender, or socioeconomic status. This approach to justice seeks to create a society that is equitable and just for all individuals.
To learn more about justice, visit:
https://brainly.com/question/28441380
#SPJ11
Which of the following are the two broad classifications of torts? Select two.
a. Criminal wrongs b. Unintentional torts c. Actionable torts d. Intentional torts
The two broad classifications of torts are intentional torts and unintentional torts.
Intentional torts occur when a person deliberately causes harm or injury to another person, such as assault, battery, or defamation. Unintentional torts, on the other hand, occur when harm or injury is caused by negligence or carelessness, such as in cases of medical malpractice or car accidents. Actionable torts, which are not one of the two broad classifications, refer to torts that can be legally pursued in court. Criminal wrongs, while related to tort law, are not considered a classification of torts as they involve violations of criminal law rather than civil law.
To learn more about tort, visit:
https://brainly.com/question/30552990
#SPJ11
in a 2006 gallup poll that rated the level of trust in the integrity of attorneys, about 20 percent of participants rated attorneys as "high" or "very high". T/F
True. In a 2006 Gallup poll, about 20 percent of participants rated the integrity of attorneys as "high" or "very high." This indicates that a significant portion of the population held a positive view of attorneys' trustworthiness during that time.
According to the 2006 Gallup poll, about 20 percent of participants rated attorneys as "high" or "very high" in terms of trust in their integrity. The Gallup poll conducted in 2006 surveyed participants on their level of trust in various professions, including attorneys. The results showed that only a small percentage of participants rated attorneys as having a high level of integrity. Specifically, about 20 percent of participants rated attorneys as "high" or "very high" in terms of trust. This suggests that there may be a general perception among the public that attorneys are not always honest or trustworthy.
Learn more about integrity of attorneys: https://brainly.com/question/31914929
#SPJ11
Near v. Minnesota was a landmark Supreme Court case involving which of the following?
a. exclusionary rule
b. due process clause
c. prior restraint
d. free exercise clause
The landmark Supreme Court case Near v. Minnesota involved prior restraint. In this case, the Court ruled that a state law authorizing the state to enjoin the publication of a newspaper on the grounds that it was a public nuisance and that it had published articles that were defamatory, scandalous, and malicious violated the freedom of the press guaranteed by the First Amendment.
The case involved a newspaper publisher named Jay Near who had published articles critical of local officials in Minneapolis. The state argued that the articles were defamatory and that the paper was a public nuisance.
The Court held that the state's attempt to enjoin the publication was unconstitutional prior restraint, meaning that the government cannot censor or restrict the press before publication unless there is a clear and present danger.
The case was a significant victory for the freedom of the press and has been cited in numerous subsequent cases to support the principle that the government cannot use prior restraint to censor or restrict the press.
to learn more about Supreme Court click here:
brainly.com/question/10831689
#SPJ11
