the constitution establishes three branches of government with different functions. this system illustrates which principle of government?

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?

What problem does obeng say that we have in the 21st century? 2. obeng argues that the pace of change has eclipsed the pace of learning. do you agree or disagree? why? 3. what is "smart failure" according to obeng?

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?