Teresa rented an apartment from Len for one year, beginning January 1st, 2008. When Teresa tried to take possession of the rental unit, Paul, a prior renter, was still there. Teresa asked Len to help her get Paul out. Len simply shrugged, telling Teresa that it was now her problem. A. Teresa must bring an eviction action against Paul. B. Teresa must wait for Paul to vacate the premises at his convenience. C. Len breached the implied warranty of possession. D. Len and Teresa have created a periodic tenancy.

exdcfvgbhjnuytresxdcvb

i honestly have no idea

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.

nothing

hope this !