List 2 benefits of physical stores and 2 benefits of E-commerce.
Blog
24. Paul lives in the town of Suburbia, located next to a ch…
24. Paul lives in the town of Suburbia, located next to a chlorine plant owned by Deadfish Co. The chlorine plant emits tons of toxic chemicals into the atmosphere. A federal environmental statute gives citizens like Paul the right to sue alleged violators. Paul files suit in federal district court against Deadfish Co., seeking remediation of any environmental damage, an injunction to prevent Deadfish Co. from producing and releasing any more toxic chemicals into the atmosphere, and for attorneys’ fees (as provided for by the federal statute). Before having a trial on the merits, Paul moved for a preliminary injunction. The court granted the preliminary injunction and Deadfish Co. immediately appealed. Deadfish Co.’s appeal of the court’s granting of a preliminary injunction was:
17. You are working with a specific enzyme-catalyzed reactio…
17. You are working with a specific enzyme-catalyzed reaction in the lab. You are a very careful experimentalist, and as a result, at the beginning of each of your experiments, you measure the temperature in the lab. On days 1 through 5, the temperature in the lab was 20oC. Today is day 6 of your experiment, and the temperature in the lab is 30oC. How do you predict that this will alter the rate of your enzyme-catalyzed reaction?
Questions 9 through 11 involve the same fact pattern. Plaint…
Questions 9 through 11 involve the same fact pattern. Plaintiff Peter files an action for negligence against Defendant Donald, a coworker, arising out of an automobile accident that occurred in the parking lot of the office of their employer. 11. Plaintiff Peter conducts some discovery in the action and realizes that Donald, his supervisor, has discriminated against Peter in their workplace. The statute of limitations on the discrimination claim expired shortly after the filing of Peter’s negligence claim. Peter wants to amend his complaint to add the discrimination claim. Under what circumstances is this possible?I. Peter can amend the complaint to add the discrimination claim if Donald consents. II. Peter can amend the complaint to add the discrimination claim because the claim relates back to the date of the filing of the complaint. III. Peter can amend the complaint to add the discrimination claim if Donald had notice of the discrimination claim within 90 days of the filing of the complaint.
19. Organisms that depend on the energy stored in chemical b…
19. Organisms that depend on the energy stored in chemical bonds by other organisms for their food energy are called ____________.
33. How many ATP’s are produced during the Krebs cycle?
33. How many ATP’s are produced during the Krebs cycle?
Name a retailer, list the retail location type in which it s…
Name a retailer, list the retail location type in which it should be located and why, and explain what you believe is its LTSCA.
7. The synthesis of sugar molecules through the process of p…
7. The synthesis of sugar molecules through the process of photosynthesis requires energy absorbed from sunlight. Bearing this in mind, what kind of reaction is photosynthesis?
26. In the reaction: C4H6O4 + FAD ®C4H4O4 + FADH2, what type…
26. In the reaction: C4H6O4 + FAD ®C4H4O4 + FADH2, what type of reaction took place to remove the protons from C4H6O4?
23. Abe collides with Brian on the highway, causing Brian to…
23. Abe collides with Brian on the highway, causing Brian to fly through his windshield and suffer serious physical injuries. Brian sues Abe in State X federal court for negligence. Abe responds by alleging Brian’s contributory negligence based on the fact that the collision occurred at 11 p.m. and Brian was operating his vehicle without his lights turned on. Assume State X is a contributory negligence state where the plaintiff’s negligence will serve as a complete bar to relief. Before submitting the case to the jury, the judge instructs it that it must return a verdict in favor of the defendant (Abe) either if they find that the defendant was not negligent at all or if they find that the plaintiff (Brian) was negligent in failing to have her lights on. The jury returns a general verdict in favor of Abe. In a subsequent case in State Y federal court, Abe sues Brian for negligence for causing his injuries in the same collision. May Abe assert the previous action as barring Brian from denying his own negligence?