Informal education describes when students teach their peers relies on a planned instructional process only takes place at home refers to the learning of cultural norms

Martha entered into a contract with terry, an art dealer. according to the contract, terry was to supply 18 th century artifacts to martha for the play she was directing, and martha was ready to pay $50,000 for this. another director needed the same artifacts and was ready to pay $60,000. terry decided not to sell the artifacts to martha. in this case, the court may order terry to:

Which act was a response to three high-profile assassinations? a. the mailing of firearms act b. the national firearms act c. the gun control act d. the brady handgun violence prevention act

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.