Res ipsa loquitur, stare decisis, and certiorari all afford stability and predictability to the law. Res ipsa loquitur is a Latin term meaning “the thing speaks for itself” and it is a rule of evidence used in civil suits. The rule allows for an inference of negligence on the part of the defendant.
Stare decisis is a legal principle in which a court should follow its previous decisions when the same legal issues arise. Certiorari is a type of writ (order) used by a higher court to review the decision of a lower court. Stare decisis affords stability and predictability to the law.
The concept of stare decisis means to stand by things decided. It is the principle of determining points of law according to precedent. The term is applied in the sense that courts should follow the principles they had established earlier in making judgments.
It provides that a court should follow the rules and principles made by it in a previous decision that has similar facts and issues. This will provide stability and predictability to the law. It ensures the continuity of the law and helps in maintaining stability and consistency in its application.
Other options: Res ipsa loquitur: This is a legal doctrine that allows the court to presume negligence without the plaintiff providing direct evidence of negligence. This does not afford stability and predictability to the law. Clemency is the act of mercy or leniency shown by the authorities to a person who has committed a crime.
This is not a legal doctrine and does not afford stability and predictability to the law. Certiorari is a writ or order from a higher court to a lower court or tribunal directing it to send up the record of a particular case for review. It does not afford stability and predictability to the law.
To know more about Res ipsa loquitur, stare decisis, and certiorari, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/12177870#
#SPJ11
if moore's law continues to be accurate for the coming decades, is ray kurzweil's prediction about ai more likely or less likely to be wrong?
Answer:
Explanation:
Ray Kurzweil's prediction about AI is that by 2045, artificial intelligence will have surpassed human intelligence, leading to a technological singularity where machines become more intelligent than humans and technological progress accelerates at an unprecedented rate.
If Moore's law continues to be accurate for the coming decades, which is the prediction that the number of transistors on a microchip doubles approximately every two years, it is more likely that Kurzweil's prediction about AI will be correct. This is because Moore's law is one of the driving forces behind the development of faster and more powerful computing systems, which are a key component of artificial intelligence. As computing power continues to increase, it is likely that AI systems will become more sophisticated and capable of performing increasingly complex tasks.
However, it is worth noting that Moore's law is not the only factor influencing the development of AI, and there are other technological and social factors that could also impact the accuracy of Kurzweil's prediction. Additionally, it is important to keep in mind that while Kurzweil's prediction has been influential, it is still just one perspective among many in the field of AI research and there is ongoing debate about the potential implications of artificial intelligence.
a state has a law that says all dogs must be restrained on a leash at any time they are outside. the purpose of that law is to protect the public from dog attacks . jeff is lazy and lets his big dog, maggie, outside without a leash. maggie attacks ricardo. under what theory is jeff liable for ricardo's injuries?
Jeff is liable for Ricardo's injuries under the theory of negligence per se, as he violated the state law that was designed to protect the public from dog attacks by allowing Maggie to be outside without a leash.
What does the theory of negligence state?The theory of negligence is a legal principle that holds individuals or entities responsible for failing to act with reasonable care, resulting in harm or injury to others.
To establish negligence, four elements must be proven: duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and damages. In other words, a person or entity owed a duty to act with reasonable care, failed to do so, and that failure caused harm or injury to another person, resulting in damages that can be compensated.
Learn more about theory of negligence on:
https://brainly.com/question/30652890
#SPJ1
When talking about an armed robbery case, a discussion about how explosives are made started. How can the discussion about explosives BEST be described in relation to the armed robbery case?
A.
relevant
B.
irrelevant
C.
interesting
D.
sophisticated
Answer:
Answer choice (B)
Explanation:
The discussion about explosives in relation to an armed robbery case can be considered as irrelevant unless there is evidence or suspicion that the perpetrator(s) used explosives in the commission of the crime. Otherwise, the discussion about explosives would not have any direct connection or relevance to the armed robbery case.
how does the criminal justice system play a role in counter terrorism
The criminal justice system plays a crucial role in counter-terrorism by investigating, prosecuting, and punishing individuals or groups who commit terrorist acts. It also works to prevent future terrorist attacks through intelligence gathering, surveillance, and analysis. Additionally, the criminal justice system provides support and assistance to victims of terrorism and their families. Overall, the criminal justice system plays a vital role in protecting national security and ensuring public safety.
the best statement of the test applied in determining if a defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries is:
Answer:
Explanation:
The best statement of the test applied in determining if a defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries is:
"Proximate cause is established when the defendant's conduct was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff's harm, and when the harm was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's conduct."
This statement encapsulates the two main elements of proximate cause: causation and foreseeability. Causation requires that the defendant's actions were a substantial factor in causing the harm suffered by the plaintiff, while foreseeability requires that the harm suffered by the plaintiff was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's conduct.
Together, these elements help to establish whether the defendant's conduct was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.
The best statement of the test applied in determining if a defendant was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries is the "but-for" test. This test determines whether, "but for" the defendant's actions, the plaintiff's injuries would not have occurred.
The "but-for" test is a legal standard used to determine whether a defendant's actions caused the plaintiff's injuries. To satisfy the test, it must be established that, "but for" the defendant's actions, the plaintiff's injuries would not have occurred. In other words, the defendant's actions must be the direct, proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries. This is often established by proving that the plaintiff's injuries were reasonably foreseeable to the defendant at the time of their actions. This standard must be met in order for a plaintiff to successfully recover damages from a defendant. Overall, the "but-for" test is an essential standard used to determine if a defendant is responsible for a plaintiff's injuries.
Here you can learn more about plaintiff's injuries https://brainly.com/question/27463491]
#SPJ11
when it comes to homicide, statistically the perpetrator is more likely to be male and the victim is more likely to be female. t/f
The given statement " when it comes to homicide, statistically the perpetrator is more likely to be male and the victim is more likely to be female" is True because This statement is supported by crime data and research about 95% of homicide perpetrators worldwide are male.
Various studies have shown that men commit the majority of homicides. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), about 95% of homicide perpetrators worldwide are male. This can be attributed to various factors such as social, cultural, and biological influences that may predispose men to engage in more aggressive and violent behaviors.
On the other hand, it is also true that women are more likely to be victims of homicide, particularly in cases of intimate partner violence or domestic violence. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) about 38% of all female homicide victims globally are killed by their intimate partners, while the figure for male victims is much lower at around 6%. This illustrates that women are disproportionately affected by intimate partner violence and are more likely to be victims of homicide in these cases.
In conclusion, the statement is true that when it comes to homicide, statistically the perpetrator is more likely to be male, and the victim is more likely to be female. This pattern can be observed across different cultures and societies, suggesting a universal trend in gender differences in homicide perpetration and victimization. However, it is important to note that while these statistics provide a general overview, each case is unique and individual circumstances may vary.
To learn more about homicide here:
https://brainly.com/question/30638493#
#SPJ11
17. In Williams v. NC (1942), why did NC not accept the Williams' NV marriage? *
(1 Point)
the Williams were not bona fide NC residents
the Williams were not bona fide NV residents
the Williams committed the crime of bigamous cohabitation in NV
all of the above
In Williams v. NC (1942), the NC did not accept the Williams' NV marriage because the Williams were not bona fide NC residents. The Option A is correct.
What was the ruling in Williams v. NC (1942)?Williams v. North Carolina is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court determined that the federal government determines marriage and divorce statuses across state lines. Mr. Williams and Ms. Hendrix relocated to Nevada and divorced their respective spouses.
Mr. Williams and Ms. Hendrix married and returned to North Carolina after their divorces were finalized. They lived there together until they were charged with bigamous cohabitation by the state of North Carolina.
Read more about Williams v. NC
brainly.com/question/21925934
#SPJ1
which statement concerning discrimination on the basis of race or ethnic identity in the united states is true?
The true statement concerning discrimination on the basis of race or ethnic identity in the United States is that it still exists in various aspects of society, including education, employment, and criminal justice. The correct option is a)
In the education system, racial disparities persist in areas such as access to quality education, standardized test scores, and dropout rates. For example, minority students are more likely to attend underfunded schools, leading to limited access to essential resources and opportunities.
In the employment sector, racial discrimination can be observed through wage gaps, biased hiring practices, and limited opportunities for career advancement. Research has shown that minority applicants often face challenges in securing job interviews due to unconscious biases among employers.
The criminal justice system is also significantly affected by racial and ethnic discrimination. Statistics reveal that minorities, particularly African Americans and Hispanics, are disproportionately represented in the prison population, and they are more likely to receive harsher sentences for similar crimes compared to their white counterparts.
To address these issues, various policies and measures have been implemented, such as affirmative action programs, anti-discrimination laws, and diversity training.
However, there is still much work to be done to ensure equal opportunities and fair treatment for all individuals, regardless of their race or ethnic background.
To learn more about discrimination here:
https://brainly.com/question/1084594#
#SPJ11
Complete Question
which statement concerning discrimination on the basis of race or ethnic identity in the united states is true?
a) it still exists in various aspects of society, including education, employment, and criminal justice.
b) different groups have had different degrees of succeed in fighting the effects of discrimination.
c) Americans under 18 years are denied many basic rights granted to those who are older.
d) older people are better organized to protect their rights that younger people.
1. Would any of the four be criminally liable for Jill’s drowning? If so, explain who and why
Criminal law is a set of laws related to a crime. Nobody will be prosecuted as no law law states that a foreigner must be saved.
Abe, the father of a drowning child, has a legal and moral obligation to try to save his child's life if he can do so without harm. However, he could be charged with manslaughter, If he decides to act.
Christie is presently in-charge. However, she could be charged with murder; If not, she could be charged with manslaughter or manslaughter, If he intended to kill the girl.
Chin doesn't appear to have committed any crimes. Hannah may have a moral obligation to act because she can probably save a drowning girl without putting herself in peril, but in utmost countries there's no legal obligation to save a foreigner.
-Felonious law prescribes behavior considered hanging , dangerous or else hanging the property, health, safety and moral security of people, including himself.
Question:
Abe takes his son Jill and his musketeers Christie and Chin to the lake. While stomping onto the wharf, Christie Chin deliberately bumps into Jill, knocking her into the water. Jill lands awkwardly and sinks to the ground. Chin pushes Christie down, ignoring the temblors. Hannah, an bystander and swimming expert, gapes at Christie but does nothing differently. Abe confronts the group and asks them to do something. However, will any of the substantiations be fulfilled? Should any of them be held responsible? explain your answer.
To know more about Criminal Law,
brainly.com/question/30000330
#SPJ4
betty hunter, a patient at community health, fell out of bed. an incident report was created. betty's attorney is now seeking all records relevant to betty's fall. the incident report is least likely to be protected from discovery if it is maintained in:
According to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), the incident report is least likely to be protected from discovery if it is maintained in: medical records.
HIPAA stands for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, which was passed by the United States Congress. It includes a range of provisions that provide guidelines for how patient data can be protected and transmitted.
An incident report is a document used to describe an event that has happened within a healthcare facility, such as a fall. This report is important because it can provide valuable information to healthcare providers about how to prevent future accidents from occurring. Betty's incident report was created to document the circumstances surrounding her fall in the community health center.
Incident reports are not considered part of the official medical record because they are created to document safety and quality issues rather than for clinical purposes. Therefore, incident reports are usually not protected by HIPAA regulations and can be released to patients or their legal representatives upon request.
If the incident report is maintained in medical records, then it is likely to be protected by HIPAA. However, if the incident report is maintained separately from the medical records, then it is less likely to be protected from discovery by the patient or their legal representative. Therefore, the incident report is least likely to be protected from discovery if it is maintained in medical records.
For more such questions on incident report, click on:
https://brainly.com/question/29635795
#SPJ11
What has been one long-term result of the constitutional protection of free speech? A) fewwe cases involving minors, B) fewer laws limiting minority rights. ,C) a more accurate election, D) a more informed society
Answer:
D) a more informed society is considered one long-term result of the constitutional protection of free speech. The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to free speech, which has helped promote the exchange of ideas and opinions, and has allowed individuals to express their views and challenge the status quo without fear of retribution. This has led to a more diverse and informed society, where a wide range of viewpoints and opinions are expressed and debated, contributing to a more robust democracy.