True: An advocate who uses the "goals case" organizational structure would start by outlining the standards that will be applied to help decide on the best course of action.
If your goal isn't obvious and defined, you won't be able to concentrate your efforts or feel fully motivated to accomplish it. Your goal must be realistic and attainable in order to be successful. Therefore, it should be difficult for you but still manageable.
You might discover chances or resources that you had never considered before that will help you reach your goals if you set attainable goals. While we all need assistance and backing to complete our goals, it's essential to keep control over them.
To know more about goals, refer:
https://brainly.com/question/1512442
#SPJ4
Which accurately describes a push marketing tactic to help manufacturers sell more products?
O A manufacturer launches a new print advertising campaign in several magazines.
O A manufacturer incorporates social media to increase brand awareness.
O A manufacturer creates a new television advertising campaign.
O A manufacturer offers department stores incentives for selling its product.
Which of the following is most true?
a. Illegal harassment and discrimination can apply to any protected category.
b. Illegal harassment and discrimination only applies to sex and gender.
c. Any type of harassment or discrimination is illegal.
d. Company policies cannot be more restrictive than the law requires.
The most accurate statement is that any type of harassment or discrimination is illegal. (option c)This answer is consistent with U.S. federal and state laws, as well as international conventions, which generally prohibit discrimination and harassment based on race, sex, age, disability, religion, national origin, and other protected categories.
In addition, harassment and discrimination can take many forms, such as unwelcome conduct that creates a hostile or offensive work environment, unfair treatment in employment decisions, and retaliation against employees who complain about discrimination or harassment. Therefore, it is important for employers to have policies and training programs that promote diversity, inclusion, and respect in the workplace.
Company policies can be more restrictive than the law requires, as long as they do not discriminate or retaliate against employees who engage in protected activities. However, it is recommended to ensure that company policies align with the law. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and state human rights agencies are responsible for enforcing anti-discrimination laws, and employees who believe they have been harassed or discriminated against can file a complaint with these agencies or pursue legal action.
To know more about harassment visit:
https://brainly.com/question/32417535
#SPJ11
Which of these is a major responsibility of members of Congress?
a
giving help to constituents
b
deciding who will receive federal grants
c
finding jobs for constitutents
d
providing analysis for the CBO
Answer:
the right answer is A answer
Which of the following is considered as innovative criminal defense strategy?
O self-defense
O battered women's syndrome
O duress
O mistake
Considering the available options, the choice that is considered as an innovative criminal defense strategy is "battered women's syndrome."
What is battered women's syndrome?Battered women's syndrome is a medical and psychological term that is used to describe the severe mental health ailment resulting from serious domestic abuse.
Given the legal situation, battered women's syndrome is not a typical condition that is common but has been innovated by some defenders to justify their offense so they can get discharged and acquitted.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded that the correct answer is Battered women's syndrome.
Learn more about the criminal defense strategy here: https://brainly.com/question/11342133
Michael Devereux v. United Parcel Service, Inc. - 2011 Tenn. LEXIS 19 (Tenn. Sup. Ct.)
decision and reasoning
The legal decisions in Michael Devereux v. United Parcel Service, Inc. - 2011 Tenn. LEXIS 19 (Tenn. Sup. Ct.) are given as follows.
Why is this so?The Tennessee Supreme Court's verdict in Michael Devereux v. United Parcel Service, Inc., determined that a lower court had made an error in providing UPS with summary judgement against an age and disability discrimination lawsuit filed by one of their employees.
The court declared that the employee presented ample evidence to establish a tangible dispute over substantive matters regarding whether UPS carried out discriminatory practices against him.
The decision was grounded on provisions stated under the Tennessee Human Rights Act, which bars employment-based discriminations associated with age and disability.
Learn more about legal decisions at:
https://brainly.com/question/10660758
#SPJ1
Describe at least 3 powers that are reserved for the National government. Describe at least 3 powers reserved for State governments. Describe at least 3 powers shared between the National and State governments. Who do you think has more power, the national or state governments, and why?
Answer:
national powers: coining money, making laws, explaining laws
state powers: minimum wage, opening schools, establishing businesses
national probably has more power because they can make and establish laws, plus they are the ones who gave the states the power
Explanation:
Is it legal for a police officer to use deadly force in self-defense or to protect the safety of others, even if it results in the death of a suspect who was unarmed and not presenting an imminent threat at the time of the incident?
Answer:
In the United States, the use of deadly force by a police officer is generally considered to be legal if the officer reasonably believes that it is necessary to protect themselves or others from imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury. This is known as the "defense of life" doctrine.
However, whether or not the use of deadly force was legally justified in a specific situation can be a complex question that depends on a variety of factors, such as the specific circumstances of the incident, the training and experience of the officer, and the laws and policies of the jurisdiction in which the incident occurred.
It is important to note that the use of deadly force is considered to be a last resort, and officers are expected to use other means of force, such as verbal commands, physical restraint, or non-lethal weapons, before resorting to deadly force.
Explanation:
The court recently interpreted the 2d amendment as meaning not only a right to own weapons but a right to carry them in public without justifying a reason too. If this is the case can individual states pass laws that restrict firearms being carried in certain areas (ie. Hospitals, Bars, Concerts, etc.) and maintain that citizens have a right to carry (bare) arms in public?
Yes, individual states can pass laws that restrict firearms from being carried in certain areas while still maintaining that citizens have the right to carry arms in public.
The interpretation of the Second Amendment as encompassing the right to carry firearms in public without needing to justify a reason does not mean that this right is absolute and unrestricted in all locations.
While individuals may have the right to bear arms, it is generally recognized that reasonable restrictions can be imposed to ensure public safety and prevent potential harm in specific locations.Individual states have the authority to enact laws that regulate the carrying of firearms in certain areas, such as hospitals, bars, concerts, and other public venues. These laws aim to balance the individual's right to bear arms with the need to maintain public safety and prevent potential risks associated with the presence of firearms in certain sensitive or crowded environments.Such laws are typically designed to establish gun-free zones or implement permit requirements for carrying firearms in specific locations.By implementing these restrictions, states can exercise their authority to protect public safety while still acknowledging the individual's right to carry arms in public spaces that are not subject to such limitations.
For more questions on laws
https://brainly.com/question/21114560
#SPJ8
This assignment is a written essay containing 500 words covering the topic below. The essay must be at least 500 words or more and written in proper APA format. This will require a cover page, body narrative, and a reference page. NOTE: The cover page and the reference page DO NOT count towards the 500 words. Remember this is APA only, it must contain in-text citations and properly cited references. DO NOT use wikipedia, no new articles, news agencies, no news channels, or magazines. These are not credible sources. Make sure the question is answered completely. You can use the book as a reference and other reliable sources.
Your completed assignment will be uploaded through canvas. Also, please do not use Essay Chapter 4 as part of your title. It is recommended that you create your own essay title. Something that you create out of your own words and thoughts.
Topic:
A man and his wife leave a nightclub and are confronted by a robber wielding a knife as they reach their car. The robber threatens to kill them if they do not give him all their money and jewelry. The husband assures the robber that he left his wallet in the car. The robber tells him to retrieve the wallet, but to be careful because he will kill the man’s wife if he tries any tricks. The man actually retrieves a loaded pistol; turns and fires the weapon; killing the suspect.
Question:
What charges will be filed against the man, if any? Does the husband rely on lawful use of force? Why? Why not?
Answer:
Title: The Legality of Using Deadly Force in Self-Defense: A Case Study
In the scenario presented, a man and his wife were confronted by a robber wielding a knife as they reached their car. The robber threatened to kill them if they did not hand over all their money and jewelry. The husband then retrieved a loaded pistol, turned and fired the weapon, killing the suspect. The question now is what charges will be filed against the man, if any, and whether the husband relied on lawful use of force.
In most jurisdictions, the use of deadly force is justified only when it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to oneself or another person. In this case, the husband could argue that he used deadly force to protect himself and his wife from the robber who was armed with a knife and had threatened to kill them. However, the use of deadly force is not justified if the attacker no longer poses an imminent threat, and the use of non-lethal force or retreat would be a reasonable option.
Moreover, the husband's use of deadly force may also be justified under the "castle doctrine," which allows individuals to use deadly force to protect themselves and their property against intruders in their own homes. However, in this case, the incident occurred outside of the couple's car, which is not considered their home, and the use of deadly force may not be justified under this doctrine.
Depending on the state, the husband may be required to retreat or use non-lethal force if he can do so safely, instead of using deadly force. However, in some states, such as the "stand your ground" states, individuals have no duty to retreat and may use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.
Therefore, the legality of the husband's use of deadly force in this case depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred. If the use of deadly force is deemed lawful, then no charges will be filed against the husband. However, if the use of deadly force is not justified under the law, then the husband may be charged with various criminal offenses, such as manslaughter or murder.
In conclusion, the legality of using deadly force in self-defense is a complex issue that depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred. In this case, the husband could argue that he used deadly force to protect himself and his wife from the robber who was armed with a knife and had threatened to kill them. However, whether the husband relied on lawful use of force depends on the specific laws and circumstances of the jurisdiction where the incident occurred.
Can a supreme court justice be impeached and removed.
Answer: The Constitution states that Justices "shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour." This means that the Justices hold office as long as they choose and can only be removed from office by impeachment. Has a Justice ever been impeached? The only Justice to be impeached was Associate Justice Samuel Chase in 1805.
Explanation:
Floyd is riding his bicycle down the street while texting on his phone. floyd does not see vivian, a store owner, who is putting magazines out in front of her storefront. he looks up just in time and swerves to miss vivian but knocks her entire magazine rack and newsstand down, totally destroying it. is floyd liable?
Answer:
Yes
Explanation:
Yes, Vivian has a competent loss and lost money.
Indeed, Vivian suffered a legitimate loss and lost money. Yes, liable
What is money?Money is a trade good accepted by general consent as a medium of economic conversation. It is the medium in which prices and values are expressed. It flows from person to person and country to country, making trade, and it is the debt measure of wealth. Money is any good that is widely used and accepted in written accounts involving the transfer of goods and divine service from one person to another.
Maybe doing something very likely to accomplish anything When we are weary, we are all more likely to make mistakes. The bridge could fall down at any time. liable to something is that you are likely to be impacted by it. If you exercise infrequently, you are more likely to get hurt.
Therefore, a legitimate loss and lost money. Yes, liable
Learn more about money here:
https://brainly.com/question/22984856
#SPJ2
a prima facie case exists where there seems to be __________ to convict the defendant.
A prima facie case exists where there seems to be sufficient evidence to convict the defendant.
In legal terms, a prima facie case refers to the establishment of a set of facts that, if taken as true, would support a legal claim or accusation. It means that on the surface, there appears to be enough evidence to suggest that the defendant may be guilty of the alleged offense.
It simply indicates that there is enough initial evidence to proceed with a trial or further legal proceedings. The burden of proof ultimately rests on the prosecution to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Learn more about defendant, here:
https://brainly.com/question/33436163
#SPJ4
According to the Supreme Court in Chimel v. California, involving the search of a house incident to an arrest for burglary of a coin shop:
Answer:
Sorry I don’t understand your cuestión
Explanation:
The set of laws allowing you to seek financial restitution from a person who broke the window of your home accidentally
The set of laws allowing you to seek financial restitution from a person who broke the window of your home accidentally is commonly known as tort law.
Tort law is a branch of law that handles wrongful actions and their consequences. In this situation, the broken window of your home caused by someone else is classified as negligence. Negligence refers to a breach of duty to take reasonable care that causes harm or loss to another person. The person who broke the window of your home was not careful enough to prevent such damage, and as a result, you experienced financial harm or loss due to the cost of repair or replacement of the window.
Therefore, you are entitled to seek financial compensation or restitution from the person who broke the window. In order to claim financial restitution, you must prove that the person who broke your window was negligent, that you experienced harm or loss, and that the harm or loss was a direct result of the other person's negligence. If you can prove all of these elements, then you have a strong case for financial restitution.
In the event that the person who broke your window refuses to pay for the damages or is unable to do so, you can take them to court, where a judge or jury will evaluate the evidence and determine whether you are entitled to financial restitution. In conclusion, the set of laws that allows you to seek financial restitution from a person who broke the window of your home accidentally is governed by tort law, specifically the principles of negligence.
Know more about Tort law here:
https://brainly.com/question/33013975
#SPJ8
Discuss the United States Supreme Court's involvement in concerns over the death penalty, and include relevant case law?
Answer:
big
Explanation:
SMALL
a cpa sued a former client for the non-payment of the final bill. although happy with the cpa's performance of services, the client claimed that the cpa is not entitled to the final bill payment because the contract between the client and the cpa failed to meet the statute of frauds. the client argues that the contract allowed up to 15 months for the cpa to complete the work, the contract price was well over $5,000, and though the client sent signed checks to the cpa, the client did not sign the contract. which of the following statements about this situation is correct?
The correct statement about this situation is "The Statute of Frauds does apply, and the requirements are not satisfied, thereby preventing enforcement of the contract terms". Therefore, the correct answer is option A.
The Statute of Frauds is a legal requirement that certain types of contracts must be in writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought. In this case, the contract between the CPA and the client falls under the Statute of Fraud because it involves a contract for services for a price of more than $5,000.
The client claims that the contract failed to meet the Statute of Fraud because it was not signed by the client. Although the client sent signed checks to the CPA, this does not satisfy the requirement that the contract itself must be signed.
Furthermore, the client argues that the contract allowed up to 15 months for the CPA to complete the work, which could also be seen as a failure to meet the Statute of Frauds requirement for a definite term.
Therefore, option A is correct. The Statute of Frauds does apply, and the requirements are not satisfied, thereby preventing enforcement of the contract terms. The CPA may need to seek legal recourse to recover the final bill payment, but the lack of a signed contract may make it difficult to do so.
To know more about Fraud refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/28239119#
#SPJ11
Complete Question:
A CPA sued a former client for nonpayment of the final bill. Although happy with the CPA’s performance of services, the client claimed that the CPA is not entitled to the final bill payment because the contract between the client and the CPA failed to meet the Statute of Frauds. The client argues that the contract allowed up to 15 months for the CPA to complete the work, the contract price was well over $5,000, and though the client sent signed checks to the CPA, the client did not sign the contract. Which of the following statements about this situation is correct?
A) The Statute of Frauds does apply, and the requirements are not satisfied, thereby preventing enforcement of the contract terms.
B) The Statute of Frauds does not apply, allowing enforcement of the contract terms.
C) The Statute of Frauds does apply, but the requirements are satisfied by the client’s signing of the checks, allowing enforcement of the contract terms.
D) The Statute of Frauds does not apply, preventing enforcement of the contract terms.
the primary legal responsibility of business is to obey the law. true or false
Answer:
True
Explanation:
The primary legal responsibility of a business is to obey the law. This means that businesses must operate within the legal framework established by the government, including complying with relevant laws, regulations, and rules. Businesses must also fulfill their legal obligations, such as paying taxes, obtaining necessary licenses and permits, and complying with labor laws and environmental regulations. While businesses have many other responsibilities, such as fulfilling their obligations to customers and stakeholders, obeying the law is the foundation of any ethical and responsible business practice.
If driving under the influence leads to a fatal collision, the driver could be charged
with vehicular manslaughter or homicide.
True or false
Answer:
true. they can be charged with Vehicular Manslaughter
In June 2009, Bernard Ramish set up a $48,000 trust fund through West Plains Credit Union to provide tuition for his nephew, Nathan Covacek, to attend Tri-State Polytechnic Institute. The trust was established under Ramish’s control and went into effect that August. In December, Ramish suffered a brain aneurysm that caused frequent, severe headaches with no other symptoms. Shortly thereafter, Ramish met with an attorney to formalize in writing that he wanted no artificial life-support systems to be used should he suffer a serious illness. Ramish designated his cousin, Lizzie Johansen, to act on his behalf, including choosing his medical treatment, should he become incapacitated. In August 2011, Ramish developed heatstroke on the golf course at La Prima Country Club. After recuperating at the clubhouse, Ramish quickly wrote his will on the back of a wine list. It stated, "My last will and testament: Upon my death, I give all of my personal property to my friend Steve Eshom and my home to Lizzie Johansen." He signed the will at the bottom in the presence of five men in the La Prima clubhouse, and all five men signed as witnesses. A week later, Ramish suffered a second aneurysm and died in his sleep. He was survived by his mother, Dorris Ramish; his son-in-law, Bruce Lupin; and his granddaughter, Tori Lupin. Using the information presented in the chapter, answer the following questions.
What would the order of inheritance have been if Ramish had died intestate?
If Ramish had died intestate, meaning without a valid will, his estate would have been distributed according to the laws of intestacy in his state of residence.
Residence refers to the place where an individual lives or has their permanent dwelling. It is the location that serves as their primary or habitual place of residence, where they reside and carry out their daily activities. Residence can refer to different types of living arrangements, including houses, apartments, condos, or other forms of housing.
Residence is more than just a physical space; it also carries legal and social implications. It often determines an individual's rights, responsibilities, and privileges within a specific jurisdiction. Legal definitions of residence may vary depending on the context and jurisdiction, and they can have implications for taxation, voting, access to services, and eligibility for certain benefits.
The order of inheritance would typically start with the closest living relatives, such as his spouse, children, or parents. In this case, since Ramish was survived by his mother, son-in-law, and granddaughter, they would have been the first in line to inherit his estate, in that order.
To learn more about residence
https://brainly.com/question/29672580
#SPJ11
The ruling in the landmark case of new york times v. Sullivan was that a public official can win a defamation case.
Answer:
I'm sorry, but that statement is incorrect. The ruling in the landmark case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan was actually the opposite - that a public official cannot win a defamation case unless they can prove that the statement was made with "actual malice." In other words, the Supreme Court ruled that public officials have a higher burden of proof in defamation cases than private citizens. This decision was a significant victory for freedom of the press and the First Amendment.
Why companies limited by guarantee must have constitution?
Answer:
A company limited by guarantee does not have any shares or shareholders (like the more common limited by shares structure) but is owned by guarantors who agree to pay a set amount of money towards company debts.
How is a student loan different from a scholarship? A student loan must be paid back, but a scholarship is not paid back. A scholarship must be paid back, but a student loan is not paid back. A student loan is a form of financial aid, but a scholarship is not. A scholarship is a form of financial aid, but a student loan is not.
Student loan different from a scholarship because: A student loan must be paid back, but a scholarship is not paid back.
Student Loan and scholarshipStudent loan can be defined as borrowing or lending money to cover your school expenses while scholarship is a financial aid or financial assistance to cover your school expenses.
When you borrowed money you are expected to payback but when it comes to scholarship you are not expected to pay back because the money given to you was free.
Inconclusion Student loan different from a scholarship because: A student loan must be paid back, but a scholarship is not paid back.
Learn more about Student Loan and scholarship here:https://brainly.com/question/488893
Which of the following is an example of a third party law? A law that requires annual car inspections. people who ride motorcycles to wear a helmet. people who drive a car to wear a seat belt. All of the above. Question 44 Which of the following is a true statement? Austrian economists believe that by raising taxes on the top income earners, we can afford our social programs, fund the military, and pay off the national debt. Keynesian economists believe that we should stimulate growth by lowering taxes and regulations, especially on business groups. Most voters may support the tax the rich strategy because one-half of income earners receive back from the government more than they pay in taxes and/or they do not consider themselves rich. The bottom half of taxpayers paid more than 60% of federal taxes in a recent year.
The correct answer to the first question is "All of the above." Each of the examples mentioned (annual car inspections, wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle, and wearing a seat belt while driving a car) represents a third party law.
These laws impose requirements or restrictions on individuals for the purpose of protecting the safety and well-being of others.
Regarding the second statement, the true statement is "Most voters may support the tax the rich strategy because one-half of income earners receive back from the government more than they pay in taxes and/or they do not consider themselves rich." This statement highlights a potential reason why many voters might support taxing the rich. It suggests that some individuals may not perceive themselves as being affected by higher taxes on top income earners and may benefit from government programs that are funded through such taxation.
It's important to note that the other statements provided in the question represent different economic perspectives and opinions, rather than universally accepted truths. Austrian economists and Keynesian economists have different views on tax policies and economic strategies. The statement about the bottom half of taxpayers paying more than 60% of federal taxes in a recent year may be a factual claim, but without specific data or context, it is challenging to determine its accuracy.
To know more about third party law
https://brainly.com/question/9996328
#SPJ11
Is it legal for a city council to ban racist speech?
A. No, racist speech is protected under the U.S Constitution
B. Yes, freedom of speech only applies to the federal government
OC. No, only the U.S. Congress can pass anti-discrimination laws
O D. Yes, speech is protected unless it is hateful
No, racist speech is protected under the U.S Constitution.
The correct answer is option A.
Can the government ban speech?
As the supreme court held in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the authorities can also forbid “incitement”—speech “directed at inciting or producing impending lawless action” and “in all likelihood to incite or produce such action” (which includes a speech to a mob urging it to assault a nearby constructing).
By using distinctive features of the Fourteenth Amendment, the first amendment's constitutional proper of unfastened speech and highbrow freedom also applies to the kingdom and local governments. Government companies and government officials are forbidden from regulating or limiting speech or other expression based totally on its content or viewpoint.
Learn more about Fourteenth Amendment here: https://brainly.com/question/12177444
#SPJ2
What is the U.S. Supreme Court's ultimate decision in Youngstown Sheet & Tube and how does it address the issue of separation of powers?
Answer:
Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), also commonly referred to as the Steel Seizure Case or the Youngstown Steel case, was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property.
Explanation:
sorry if i'm wrong
As future law enforcement officer, how will you handle a case involving a child in conflict with the law?
Answer:
does this help?
Explanation:
What is Hamlet's tragic flaw in Act 5?
The tragic flaw of Hamlet is "procrastination." His ongoing awareness and uncertainty prevent him from taking the necessary action. After realising Claudius has been poisoned, Hamlet kills him at last.
His terrible weakness, procrastination, sends him and the other individuals he targets to their deaths.
Despite the fact that tragedies had been written in English before Shakespeare, he is credited for giving them their distinctive elements and elevating them to the highest levels of artistic achievement. Shakespeare's play shows how the fatal fault in the character of the hero operates. Shakespeare's tragedies are primarily tragedies of character, while chance, fate, and the supernatural also play a part in the downfall of the hero. In literature, a character defect known as a "tragic flaw" refers to a personality feature that causes the protagonist to ultimately fail. The phrase "tragic defect" is derived from a Greek idea.
Learn more about Tragic flaw here:
https://brainly.com/question/29547592
#SPJ4
Threatening to physically harm a person is protected under freedom of speech.
True
False
Answer: It is False!!
Explanation:
That is the correct answer on pearson
What does contempt of court libel slander mean?
Contempt of court, libel, and slander are legal terms referring to different offenses.
Contempt of court involves disrespecting court authority, libel refers to written defamatory statements, and slander involves spoken defamatory statements.
Contempt of court occurs when someone disobeys or shows disrespect to a court's authority or its proceedings. This may include, but is not limited to, failing to follow court orders, disrupting court proceedings, or making disrespectful remarks about the court or its officers.
Libel is a form of defamation in which false and damaging statements are made about a person or entity in writing or published materials. This can harm the subject's reputation and potentially lead to legal consequences for the publisher.
Slander is a form of defamation where false and damaging statements are spoken about a person or entity. Like libel, slander can harm the subject's reputation and result in legal consequences for the speaker. Both libel and slander aim to protect individuals and entities from unwarranted harm to their reputation.
To know more about defamatory statements click on below link:
https://brainly.com/question/13264091#
#SPJ11
1. what distinguishes a paralegal or legal assistant from other law office personnel, such as secretaries or receptionists?
A paralegal typically assumes more legal responsibility, frequently writing legal drafts and creating legal correspondence on behalf of the attorney, while a legal secretary serves in a more clerical capacity by typing, transcribing, and filing.
The fact that substantive legal work is performed by legal assistants/paralegals is a key distinction between their roles and those of legal secretaries. Working in substantive law requires a thorough understanding of the law and procedural law. In the absence of their paralegals, attorneys would be required to complete this work on their own. The following are necessary for substantive legal work, according to the NFPA: recognizing, assessing, organizing, analyzing, and communicating relevant facts and legal concepts are all important. Education and training are needed for this kind of work. Before a person is considered qualified to perform substantive legal work as a legal assistant or paralegal, educational and training standards are formalized in some states with certification requirements. Paralegals can choose to specialize in their field, obtain national certification, or complete advanced degrees to advance their careers. Even though legal secretaries are necessary for the operation of law offices, their work does not involve substantive legal matters. They are the practice's administrative force: Among other responsibilities, file management, calendar management, appointment scheduling, document preparation, travel planning, database management, and taking notes during meetings are among them. Many legal secretaries have not gone to college, and they are not required by law to meet education or training standards. Legal secretaries earn less than paralegals because their jobs don't require as much legal knowledge. However, the field offers opportunities for specialization and continuing education. Regardless of the official definition, some people refer to their legal secretaries as "legal assistants." As a result, it is critical for candidates for paralegal positions to understand the responsibilities and expectations of the position before accepting it.
To know more about paralegal visit
brainly.com/question/29345945
#SPJ4