Mrs. Braun is the art instructor at the local high school. Dale is a student. One day the maintenance staff forgot to display a warning that the floors had been mopped and were wet. The stairway to the art studio was so slippery that Dale fell down the stairs, breaking his arm. Mrs. Braun was teaching class at the time. When she heard the noise of his fall, she ran out to see what was wrong. She, too, slipped and broke her ankle. -

1.)Who is responsible for Dale’s injury? For Mrs. Braun’s injury?

2.). From whom can Dale recover damages? Is there a limit to the amount he can recover?

3.)From whom can Mrs. Braun recover damages? How will she recover these damages? Is there a limit to the amount she can recover?

4.) Why does the law treat these two injured people differently? Is this fair? Explain.

Charles schenck was a u. s. citizen and private in the army. while in military training during world war i, schenck printed and passed out leaflets explaining why he was against the draft (required military service). he was charged with violating the espionage act of 1917, a federal law outlawing any action interfering with military operations. schenck believed the espionage act violated his right to free speech. in which court would this case ultimately be decided, and why? a state criminal court, because schenck was accused of violating a criminal law a military tribunal, because the matter involved members of the military a county civil court, because it involved violation of a civil liberty the u. s. supreme court, because schenck challenged whether the law was constitutional

1. in the debate for the student council election, a student candidate quoted explicit lyrics from a popular song. the school suspended him for two days, in line with school policy. 2. a student sued the school over its policy of holding two proms: one for african american students and one for white students. - are these civil or criminal cases? how do you know? - which court has original jurisdiction in the case: state court, federal court, or the u. s. supreme court? -. where will the case go next if it is appealed?

Voters commonly condemn politicians for being insincere, but politicians often must disguise their true feelings when they make public statements. if they expressed their honest views—about, say, their party's policies—then achieving politically necessary compromises would be much more difficult. clearly, the very insincerity that people decry shows that our government is functioning well. which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines this reasoning? (a) achieving political compromises is not all that is necessary for the proper functioning of a government. (b) some political compromises are not in the best long-term interest of the government. (c) voters often judge politicians by criteria other than the sincerity with which they express their views. (d) a political party's policies could turn out to be detrimental to the functioning of a government. (e) some of the public statements made by politicians about their party's policies could in fact be sincere.