A plaintiff filed a negligence action against two defendants in federal district court, invoking the court's diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. Prior to serving their answers, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court denied the motion, concluding that subject matter jurisdiction was proper. The defendants then filed their answers responding to the merits of the complaint and denying negligence. The defendants' answers also contained motions to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Five weeks later, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the action for improper venue. If the court determines that venue in fact is improper, how should the court rule on the defendants' venue motion

If the court determines that the venue is inappropriate, it will be necessary for the court to deny the venue motion.

Explanation:

If the court determines that the venue is inappropriate, it will be necessary for the court to deny the venue motion. This will be the right thing to do because the defendants did not raise any objections during the pre-answer motion that would demonstrate that they were seeking jurisdiction over the matter. In this case, the defendants waived any objection to the venue motion.

answer:

the colonists had their reasons for creating a weak central (federal) government under the articles of confederation. not only did they create a weak federal government, they restricted the powers of the state governors because they were so concerned about the leaders abusing their power.

same

they had banned mine while i was answering a question