A homeowner filed a federal diversity action against the manufacturer of a pressure cooker for a products liability action based on state law, alleging that she was severely burned because the top flew off the pressure cooker during operation. Under the state law, a jury verdict does not have to be unanimous. However, a specific rule under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directly conflicts with the state law and provides that jury verdicts in federal court must be unanimous. Which statement correctly presents what law the federal judge should apply regarding the jury verdict

The federal rule must apply in this case.

Explanation:

A federal court must, in fact, apply to state law when it has a case that was initiated under state law. However, when this case is also based on diversity of citizenship, a federal statute, or a federal rule, as shown in the case above, the court must apply the federal rule, provided that procedural rule does not interfere or deny any right, as shown in the case of the question above. Therefore, the court must apply federal rule.

anticipatory breach of contract

as the name suggests, an anticipatory breach is a breach of contract before the time of performance. so, if a promisor denies to perform his promise and signifies his unwillingness before the time for performance, then it is an anticipatory breach of contract.

and

actual breach of contract

while an anticipatory breach is before the time of performance, an actual breach of contract is on the scheduled time of performance of the contract. an actual breach of contract can be committed either.

hope this . : )

all i have to say is that people are truly ignorant and don't have anything better to do with their lives.