Ed wants to give howard his old car, but howard says he doesn’t want it. howard later reconsiders and tells ed he does want the car. his previous repudiation means there is no gift, and howard has no rights in the car.

The answer is TRUE

Explanation:

Howard previous rejection means he has no right right in the car, because Ed; the real owner of the car gifted it out to Howard, at that moment, if he(Howard) accepted it, he became the rightful owner of the car, but he refused, which makes Ed the rightful owner of the car, and he might decide not to gift him again.

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.

answer; ///relational devaluation;