in the contested election of 2000, the supreme court halted the and declared george bush the winner in bush v. gore.

You are serving on a jury. a plaintiff is suing the city for injuries sustained after falling down an uncovered manhole. in the trial, doctors testified that it will be 5 years before the plaintiff is able to return to work. the jury has already decided in favor of the plaintiff, and has decided to grant the plaintiff an award to cover the following items: a. recovery of 2 years of back-pay ($34,000 for two years ago, and $36,000 for last year, which ends today). assume that it is december 31 and that all salary is received at year end. this recovery should include the time value of money. b. the present value of 5 years of future salary. assume that the plaintiff's salary would increase at a rate of 3 percent per year. c. $100,000 for pain and suffering. d. $20,000 for court costs. assume an interest rate of 7 percent. what should be the size of the settlement?

How does désir represent the diversity of europe today? how did the 1400s and 1500s affect the religious diversity of europe? how might cultural diversity in a place like germany affect everyday life? what are two reasons some europeans might find immigration to be an advantage? what are two reasons some might find it to be a disadvantage? why do you think languages and culture spread more easily in europe now than in the past?

Aplaintiff filed a civil action based on negligence against a defendant in federal district court, alleging that the defendant negligently ran a red light at an intersection and collided with the plaintiff's vehicle, causing the plaintiff's injuries. a week after the close of discovery, the plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment on the issue of whether the defendant was negligent. with the motion, the plaintiff filed (i) his own sworn affidavit, which stated that the traffic signal was green as he entered the intersection, (ii) an affidavit of a witness who was driving the car behind him, which stated that the witness saw the entire incident and that the plaintiff's traffic signal was green as he approached and entered the intersection; and (iii) an affidavit of another witness, which stated that she saw the entire incident and that the defendant's signal had been red for several seconds before the defendant entered the intersection and was still red when the defendant entered the intersection. the defendant filed a response to the motion, noting that her answer denied negligence and further denied that her traffic signal was red, and argued that the issue of negligence and the issue of whether her traffic signal was red were in dispute, so those issues should be tried to a jury. how should the court rule on the plaintiff's motion?