I NEED THE CORRECT ANSWER TO THIS ASAP AS IN RIGHT NOW!!!! Which of the following shows the most likely order that a case would take through the federalcourt system?

A) Supreme Court --> Appeals Court --> District Court
B) District Court --> Appeals Court --> Supreme Court
C) District Court --> Supreme Court --> Appeals Court
D) Appeals Court --> District Court --> Supreme Court

Answers

Answer 1
Answer: D hope that can help you
Answer 2
Answer:

Answer:

The answer is B.

Explanation:

Mostly all Cases start in Your local District Court Then move up from there in this order...

-

District Court --> Appeals Court --> Supreme Court


Related Questions

As you approach an intersection blanks around and through the intersection for traffic controls and other road users already in the intersection
How is formal authority distinguished and give examples of each characteristic from the SAA case
Who led the argument before the supreme court in the brown v. Board of education case and later became a supreme court justice?
Your own thoughts about criminal justice system?
In the United States v. Park, was this corporate executive defendant held criminally liable for failing to ensure the company's compliance with the law?a. That the defendant could not be held liable because it could not be proven by a reasonable doubt that he knew warehouse employees were failing to take proper steps to ensure sanitary conditionsb. That the defendant could not be held liable because it could not be proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he knew warehouse employees were failing to take proper steps to insure sanitary conditionsc. That the defendant could not be held liable because he did not personally cause the contaminationd. That the defendant could be held liable because he hid evidence of the offensese. That the defendant could be held liable because he failed to see that those delegated the duty to ensure sanitary conditions did their job

A mandatory airbag law ends up raising the number of traffic fatalities if it lowers fatalities per accident from 0.05 to 0.03 while raising the number of accidents per period from 25,000 to any more than around __________________ accidents per period. a.43,500
b.38,500
c.57,450
d.41,667

Answers

Answer:

The answer is d. 41,667 accidents.

Explanation:

The formula for evaluating the number of accidents raised period when the number of frailties is lowered, and the initial number of accidents is increased from 25,000 to X;

Where X = initial number of accidents per period × (initial frailties of accidents ÷ latest frailties of accidents)

Therefore, X = 25,000 × (0.05 ÷ 0.03) = 41,667 accidents.

Which branch of government decides if a law violates the constitution?

Answers

The branch of government that decides if a law violates the Constitution is the Judicial branch. The Judicial branch, specifically the Supreme Court, has the power of judicial review, which allows it to determine the constitutionality of laws and government actions. If the Supreme Court finds that a law violates the Constitution, it can declare the law unconstitutional and render it invalid.

The judicial branch is that branch of the governmentthat interprets the law, settles disputes and administers justice to all citizens. The judicial branch is considered the watchdog of democracy, and also the guardian of the Constitution. The judicial branch has the authority to render a law invalid if the law seems to violate the constitution.

To learn more about "Branch of the government" visit: brainly.com/question/8480333

#SPJ11

Answer:  The correct answer is the Judicial Branch.

Explanation:

The Judicial branch of the government decides whether laws are unconstitutional, among other things.

DNA evidence is typically easy to find at a crime scene.
True
False

Answers

DNA evidence is useful in solving crimes but it is not easy to find at crime scenes so this is false.

Why isn't DNA evidence more widely used?

Even though DNA evidence can help solve a crime faster, it is not very easy to find at crime scenes.

This is because not all can give the relevant material required for DNA testing, and there is also the issue of contamination.

Find out more on DNA evidence at brainly.com/question/17677132.

#SPJ2

Answer:

false

Explanation:

Against utilitarianism, which of the following authors would object, “To maximize utility by imposing burdens on some individuals is to treat all of society like a single person. But society is not like a single person, and so utilitarianism is mistaken.

Answers

Answer:

(D) A and B or both correct

Explanation:

As an entrepreneur, you’ll face lots of tough and sometimes ethical decisions. In the situation described below, what do you think is the right thing to do. A potential customers wants to visit your place of business. Should you introduce friends as "employees" and "customers" so your firm looks bigger and busier?

Answers

Answer:

idk

Explanation:idk

Answer:

ummmmmmmmmmmmm i need the same answer

Explanation:

SoRrY :O

Difference between first degree murder and second degree murder

Answers

first degree murder is usually planned and done with intent. second degree murder is usually in the spur of the moment and is reckless
Other Questions
Project: Lulu the Runaway DogProject Part A: Lulu the Runaway Dog Let's review the runaway dog example. When you see Lulu escape, you shout, "Come back, Lulu!" but Lulu the Labrador has already run through one neighbor's yard and is racing down the street. You decide that pursuing her in your fuel-efficient Focus would be the best course of action. However, you can't possibly end your phone conversation. After all, you are discussing the latest Dame Daisy video and analyzing it minute by minute. With your phone in one hand, car keys in the other, you rev up your car and head off to find Lulu. Jamie, Lulu's ten-year-old owner whom you are also babysitting, jumps in the car with you. As you are driving (a little faster than the speed limit) and talking on your phone, an annoying fly starts to buzz around your head. You shake your head and as you refocus and look ahead, there is Lulu—right in front of your car. You slam on your brakes and turn the wheels of the car sharply to the right with all your might to avoid hitting Lulu. A motorist opposite you drives onto the curb and bangs up the side of his car as he avoids hitting your vehicle. You slam into a utility pole, which was badly in need of repair, and knock it down. The pole hits a tree that smashes into a house and severely damages the front porch. Luckily, Lulu is fine. So is the motorist, who is very angry. Jamie is complaining that her wrist feels like it is all twisted. You cannot help thinking, "Oh boy, am I in trouble!" But you are "just a kid," right? Where do you start to sort out this mess? You start by contacting your cousin, Marjorie, who is a first-year law student at State University. You tell her every little detail you remember, including all events leading up to the accident. She wants to help you determine to whom you may have owed a duty of care and to whom you breached this duty. She sends you an email with the questions listed below. Please answer them. Marjorie's Questions: Who was involved in the accident? Did you owe a duty to anyone? If so, what duty or duties and to which particular individuals? Which duties did you breach? Were your actions the cause of any injuries? Were you actions an actual cause or a proximate cause, or both? For what damages could you be held liable? Are there any defenses against potential plaintiffs? If so, what are they? Provide a brief four- to five-paragraph answer. Project Part B: A Fire near Gidgits Galore Gidgits Galore borders a privately owned ten-acre forest. Pete owns the land. It is zoned "mixed," so businesses and residences can be found throughout the neighborhood. Through the forest is a multiresidence apartment building. Danny, a high-school senior who lives in one of the apartments, has crammed all night for his economics final and needs a break. He has decided to take a morning walk down one of the forest's paths, prodding the piles of leaves and clumps of moss with his walking stick. He sees what appeared to be a recently-used campfire, and pokes around it with his stick. As he wanders farther, he doesn't realize that he has reignited the fire. To make matters worse, it is unexpectedly windy that day. As the wind picks up, the flames leap over 200 feet to a storage shed used by the apartment building's maintenance workers. One of them, Don, has just arrived to get his lawnmower. He calls 911. While waiting, he tries to extinguish the flames with his jacket, but he stops when his work shirt catches fire. The flames also reach the tent of Cassie, the camper who lit the campfire the previous night. Cassie thought she had extinguished the fire as she set up her tent nearby. Cassie wakes up coughing from smoke inhalation and manages to exit the tent before it is destroyed by fire. One of Gidgits Galore's managers, Dianne, arrives to open up the store but is detoured by the smoke she sees in the distance. Soon she too is overwhelmed by its acrid smell, which brings on a severe asthma attack. As quickly as the flames started, the wind stops, and they die down. Firefighters who arrive on the scene are able to quickly extinguish the fire. You are a member of a mock jury in a negligence case. As a juror, one of your duties is to find the facts from the evidence presented and determine if there is enough evidence to show that the defendant was negligent. Sort out the facts in the present case. Prepare a brief argument (three to four paragraphs) outlining why Danny could be held negligent against the potential plaintiffs listed below. Don the maintenance worker Cassie the camper Dianne the GidgitsGalore employee Pete the landowner Prepare a brief argument (two to three paragraphs) showing why Danny's conduct did not amount to negligence against any of the potential plaintiffs listed above.