in this case, the court determined it had personal jurisdiction. did the court also have jurisdiction over property located within its boundaries?

Explanation:

The New York Times Co. v. United States case, commonly known as the "Pentagon Papers case," was a legal dispute that arose in 1971 between the United States government and several major newspapers, including The New York Times, over the publication of classified documents related to the Vietnam War.

In 1967, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara commissioned a top-secret study on the U.S. government's decision-making process during the Vietnam War. The study, which became known as the "Pentagon Papers," consisted of a 7,000-page report that detailed the U.S. government's involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. In 1971, Daniel Ellsberg, a former government employee who had worked on the study, leaked portions of it to The New York Times and other newspapers.

The government argued that the publication of the classified documents would harm national security and requested that The New York Times and other newspapers cease publication of the materials. The newspapers argued that the First Amendment protected their right to publish the materials in the public interest.

The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the newspapers in a 6-3 decision. The Court held that the government had not met the heavy burden of proving that the publication of the materials would result in "direct, immediate, and irreparable" harm to national security. The Court further noted that the government's argument for prior restraint on the publication of the materials was unconstitutional, as it would amount to an impermissible abridgment of the freedom of the press.

The decision in the New York Times Co. v. United States case was a landmark victory for press freedom and the First Amendment, affirming the important role that the press plays in holding the government accountable to the public. The case set a precedent for future cases involving the publication of classified materials and established a high bar for the government to meet in order to justify prior restraint on the press.

Jane Doe is liable for 23% of the total damages, while John Wick is liable for 33% of the total damages. Jane Doe must pay John Wick R75,950.00 in damages.

Based on the given information, the calculation for damages and who must pay whom is as follows:

Calculate the percentage of negligence for each driver:

Jane Doe is 23% negligent

John Wick is 33% negligent

Calculate the total amount of damages for each vehicle:

Range Rover: R175,000.00

Porsche Cayenne: pre-accident value of R985,000.00 (VAT)  minus salvage value of R125,000.00, which equals R860,000.00 in damages

Calculate each driver's liability for damages:

Jane Doe is liable for 23% of the total damages, which is R201,500.00 [(R175,000.00 + R860,000.00) x 0.23]

John Wick is liable for 33% of the total damages, which is R277,450.00 [(R175,000.00 + R860,000.00) x 0.33]

Calculate the net amount that each driver must pay:

Jane Doe must pay John Wick R75,950.00 [R277,450.00 - R201,500.00]

Therefore, John Wick will receive R75,950.00 from Jane Doe.

Thus, Jane Doe must pay John Wick R75,950.00 in damages.

To know more about VAT, visit

brainly.com/question/31341634

#SPJ1

The complete question is: Jane Doe purchased a Range Rover last week for R790 500 (VAT incl). While driving from the Dube Port area along the N2 Road in Durban, she collides with John Wick, who is the owner-driver of a Porshe Cayenne. Doe is 23% negligent, whereas Wick is 33% negligent. The damage to the Range Rover is estimated at R175 000.00. It is uneconomical to repair the Porsche, but its salvage value is R125 000.00. The pre-accident value of the Porsche was R985 000.00. With reference to the damages to Doe and Wick's motor vehicles, calculate who must pay whom, and what would be the amount in damages.

Answer: 6 months

Explanation:

Answer:

Expenditure approach to calculate GDP.

Explanation:

The terms represent the components of the expenditure approach used in calculating a country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

The expenditure approach sums up the total amount spent on goods and services produced within the country during a given period, typically a year.

The components of GDP using the expenditure approach are:

Consumption (C): the total spending by households on goods and services during the period.

Government spending (G): the total spending by the government on goods and services during the period.

Investment (I): the total spending on new capital equipment, buildings, and inventory by firms during the period.

Net Exports (NX): the difference between the value of exports and imports during the period.

The residual item in the expenditure approach is the difference between the total output (GDP) and the sum of the three components (C + G + I), which represents the net exports (NX).

So, the method used is the Expenditure approach to calculate GDP.

Burglary is defined as a forced entry into or exit from an insured's property with the purpose of stealing the insured's property. Forced entry or exit must be clearly visible.

Indemnity, A common legal rule relating to insurance that states that the person receiving benefits under an insurance policy should be put back in roughly the same financial situation as before the loss.

These forms are preferred because under a "loss discovered" form, regardless of when the act or loss occurred, coverage is applied to losses that are discovered during the policy period. • When a loss is really experienced, coverage is applied using a "loss sustained" form.

To know more about Loss occurs visit:-

https://brainly.com/question/20526582

#SPJ9

The complete question is below:-

A loss that occurs when an individual breaks into a safe and leaves visible signs of forcible entry best describes

a. Burglary

b. Robbery

c. Mysterious disappearance

d. Larceny

In 1908, Theodore Roosevelt did not run for another term as president because he had promised not to run again in 1904. Therefore, the correct option is C. in 1904 he had promised not to run again.

In 1904, Roosevelt had won re-election as President. Before his second term, he announced he would not run for another term as President. Therefore, in 1908, Roosevelt kept his word and did not run for another term as President. He instead supported his Secretary of War, William Howard Taft, who was ultimately elected President.

To know more about President:

https://brainly.com/question/497462

#SPJ11

Under Texas law, defenses take a variety of forms. A type of defense that the prosecutor must disprove in establishing the elements of the crime is known as an affirmative defense.

This means that the defendant's guilt is established when the prosecutor proves beyond a reasonable doubt all the elements of the crime. The defendant must then provide evidence to support the affirmative defense.

The jury must then determine if the defendant's evidence proves their defense by a preponderance of the evidence, which is a lower standard than the prosecutor's beyond a reasonable doubt standard.

An example of an affirmative defense is self-defense. A defendant can claim that their use of force was necessary to defend themselves against harm, and the prosecutor must disprove this to establish the defendant's guilt.

Texas law defenses can be grouped into two main categories: those that negate an element of the crime, and those that are affirmative defenses. Defenses that negate an element of the crime will result in the defendant's acquittal if the prosecutor fails to prove all the elements beyond a reasonable doubt.

For example, if the defendant can prove that they did not have the requisite intent to commit the crime, then the prosecutor cannot establish the guilt of the defendant.

Another example of a negation defense is alibi. If the defendant can provide an alibi for their where abouts at the time of the crime, then the prosecutor must disprove this to establish the defendant's guilt.

In summary, affirmative defenses require the defendant to provide evidence to support their defense, while defenses that negate an element of the crime result in the defendant's acquittal if the prosecutor cannot prove all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

To know more about Texas law refer here:

https://brainly.com/question/8610964#

#SPJ11

Graduated sanctions most often utilized by community services officers do NOT include is Warnings/admonishments. The correct answer is D.

Graduated sanctions - Graduated sanctions refer to a series of penalties that increase in severity with the degree of noncompliance. Graduated sanctions are essential in community corrections since they help in reducing the costs of incarcerating offenders by providing appropriate community-based alternatives. Moreover, graduated sanctions act as a deterrent mechanism by making it clear to the offenders that noncompliance comes with a consequence.

Community services officers - Most community corrections programs utilize graduated sanctions to regulate offender behavior. The primary role of community services officers is to supervise and ensure the enforcement of the conditions of community supervision. Community service officers are expected to work closely with probation and parole officers and provide a range of services, including counseling, referral to specialized services, and drug testing. They also have the mandate to impose graduated sanctions when offenders violate their supervision conditions.

In conclusion, community services officers most often use graduated sanctions in regulating offender behavior. Warnings/admonishments are NOT included in the graduated sanctions utilized by community services officers.

For more such question on sanctions

https://brainly.com/question/29547541

#SPJ11

When more actors become subjects and agents of international law, the development of global governance is eventually possible.

Global governance refers to the institutions, rules, norms, and processes that manage the interconnected global problems and promote collective action to address them. The rise of globalization and the increasing interdependence among states have made global governance more important than ever before.

Globalization has challenged the traditional concept of sovereignty and state-centered international law. The rise of non-state actors such as multinational corporations, international organizations, NGOs, and individuals have increased the complexity and diversity of global governance.

The traditional legal framework is no longer sufficient to address the transnational problems such as climate change, terrorism, human rights, public health, and cybersecurity. Therefore, the development of global governance has become a pressing need in the contemporary world.

More actors become subjects and agents of international law means that the scope and depth of global governance are expanding. It implies that more actors are participating in the creation and implementation of global norms and standards. It also means that more actors are being held accountable for their actions in the global arena. As a result, the legitimacy and effectiveness of global governance are enhanced.

However, the development of global governance is not without challenges. The diversity of actors and interests can lead to conflicts and power struggles. The lack of democratic accountability and transparency can also undermine the legitimacy of global governance. Therefore, the development of global governance requires a balance between inclusiveness and effectiveness, and between legitimacy and accountability.

To learn more about global governance here:

https://brainly.com/question/29498047#

#SPJ11

The tort of contract interference is an intentional tort.

A tort of contract interference occurs when one party induces or persuades another party to breach a contract they have with a third party without just cause. This tort can take many forms, including enticing the breach of an employment contract, making a defamatory statement about a person's business to a customer or client, and interfering with the completion of a construction project by persuading a contractor not to perform their obligations.

The tort of contract interference is an intentional tort because it involves the deliberate act of persuading another party to breach a contract. This is in contrast to unintentional torts, which occur when harm is caused to another party without intent, such as in cases of negligence or strict liability.

You can learn more about contract interference at: brainly.com/question/15078648

#SPJ11

Answer:

d. the constitution breaks the power of the government up into 3 branches is an example of limited government, as it establishes checks and balances between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful.