instruction
stringlengths 53
4.17k
| response
stringlengths 1
3.48k
|
|---|---|
Able, an attorney, sued Clinton, a client, for his fee, based on an agreed hourly rate. Clinton subpoenaed the attorney's time records for the days on which he purported to have worked for Clinton to show that Able had billed an impossible number of hours to Clinton and others on those days. Clinton's subpoena provided that any information concerning the matters handled for other clients be deleted or masked. Able moved to quash the subpoena on the ground of attorney-client privilege. The subpoena should be:
Options:
A. Upheld, because the information about hours billed is not within the privilege.
B. Upheld, because an attorney has no right to invoke his client's privilege without instructions from the client.
C. Quashed, because an attorney is entitled to a right of privacy for the work product in his files.
D. Quashed, because no permission was obtained from the other clients to divulge information from their files. | A |
Tyrone challenged Dennison to an automobile race from Smalltown to Littleburg, a distance of 11 miles. The only road that ran between the two cities was Highway 17, a two-lane country road. At the 7-mile mark, Tyrone attempted to pass Dennison by pulling into the lane to the left of the center line. At that moment, Pryor's car came into view, heading directly at Tyrone's vehicle. Tyrone applied his brakes and attempted to pull back into the lane to the right of the center line. In so doing, Tyrone lost control of his vehicle and collided with Pryor's car. Dennison's car, having already passed Pryor's car, was not involved in the collision. Pryor brings suit against Dennison for damages suffered in the collision. Which of the following would be Dennison's best course of action?
Options:
A. Seek dismissal of the claim, because Dennison did not cause Pryor's damage.
B. Seek indemnity from Tyrone, if Pryor recovers a judgment against Dennison.
C. Ask the court to limit his liability to onehalf of Pryor's damages.
D. Seek contribution from Tyrone, if Pryor recovers a judgment against Dennison. | D |
Jeff lived in Arkanzona, a state where gambling was illegal. Nevertheless, Jeff gambled on a regular basis. Unfortunately, Jeff had a string of bad luck and needed a loan. Jeff asked his friend Steve to lend him $ 5,000$ to bet on a football game. Jeff claimed that the heavily favored Sabrebacks would lose the game because the game was fixed, and thus he could make a fortune by betting $ 5,000$ against them. Steve, not wanting to miss out on a good deal, agreed to lend Jeff $ 2,500$ if Jeff would bet the other $ 2,500$ for Steve. Jeff agreed, took Steve's $ 5,000$, and placed the bet. Jeff's tip paid off and Jeff won on 4-to-1 odds. He gave Steve his $ 5,000$ back but refused to tender any winnings. If Steve sues Jeff to recover the winnings due under the contract, who will prevail?
Options:
A. Steve, because he fully performed his part of the bargain.
B. Steve, because the court will not allow Jeff to unfairly profit from his illegal contract.
C. Jeff, because the contract was illegal and the court will not enforce an illegal contract.
D. Jeff, because the contract was illegal and the court will only act to put the parties in the status quo ante, and Steve already has his money back. | C |
Sonny was arrested for shoplifting. As Sonny was being booked at the police station, Sonny's mother, Betty, arrived at the station. As she was talking with Sonny, Photog, a reporter for the Daily News, took Betty's picture. The photograph of Betty appeared on the front page of the next day's edition of the Daily News. The story of Sonny's arrest appeared just below it. A caption to the photograph identified Betty as Sonny's mother. Later that week, Betty lost her job as a result of the story in the Daily News. If Betty asserts a claim against the Daily News for invasion of privacy, Betty most likely will:
Options:
A. Recover, if she was not involved in the events that led to Sonny's arrest.
B. Recover, because the photograph and news story caused Betty to be discharged from her employment.
C. Not recover, since Betty's photograph was taken in a public place.
D. Not recover, because the caption was accurate. | C |
Mom, a wealthy woman, wished to buy her son, Sylvester, an expensive Rolls-Royce for a wedding present. She visited Dealership, a Rolls-Royce dealer, several times, looked at many cars, and discussed possible sales prices with Huck, a salesman. On May 15, after much discussion, Huck and Mom signed a writing that stated, "If we can agree on price on or before June 1, Mom agrees to buy and Huck, for Dealership, agrees to sell one yellow Rolls-Royce Silver Streak, serial number XO857623." On May 20, Mom dispatched a letter to Huck stating, "I will buy the Rolls-Royce for $ 150,000$." On the same day, Huck dispatched a letter to Mom, stating, "I will sell the Rolls-Royce for $ 150,000$." Has a valid contract been formed between Dealership and Mom?
Options:
A. Yes, because the May 15 writing constitutes a contract with a missing price term, and that term was filled by the crossing offers.
B. Yes, because when two crossing offers are identical in import, one will be treated as an offer and the other as an acceptance.
C. No, because there were two crossing offers and no acceptance; hence there was no mutual assent.
D. No, but the result would be different if Mom were a merchant. | C |
The Drug Control Act is a federal law that seeks to control those substances that are dangerous to the health of the population in general. The statute provides substantial penalties for violations of the Act. The Food and Drug Administration has conducted a substantial number of tests on a new drug called Gelutan. The results of the studies show that the drug might have dangerous side effects when taken regularly, and the Food and Drug Administration now seeks to prohibit its distribution under the Drug Control Act. Drugco, a major pharmaceutical company that desires to market Gelutan, sues to have the statute declared unconstitutional. The most likely result in this suit is that the statute will be declared to be:
Options:
A. Constitutional, as a proper exercise of the general welfare power.
B. Constitutional, as a proper exercise of Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce.
C. Unconstitutional, because it interferes with the right of privacy of Gelutan users.
D. Unconstitutional, because it deprives Drugco of property without just compensation. | B |
Fred is arrested and charged with the burglary of Sam's warehouse. At the request of the police investigating the burglary, the night watchman at Sam's Warehouse who had seen the thief leaving the premises wrote out a description of a person who bore a strong likeness to Fred. However, the night watchman died of a heart attack before Fred was arrested and brought to trial. The prosecution attempts to offer the description written out by the night watchman into evidence. The description is:
Options:
A. Admissible as a past recollection recorded.
B. Admissible as an identification of a person the night watchman knew committed the crime in question.
C. Inadmissible as hearsay not within an exception.
D. Inadmissible as an opinion of a nonexpert. | C |
Baxter was heavily in debt and was concerned that his home was about to be repossessed. To try to generate money to satisfy his creditors, Baxter promised to pay his friend Dunn $ 100$ if Dunn would enter Baxter's house that evening and take his expensive color television and stereo. Baxter explained that he would then report the items as being stolen to the insurance company and collect a settlement from them. Baxter gave Dunn directions to his home, which was one of several tract houses in a fairly new development. Baxter told Dunn to arrive at approximately 9 p.m. and to enter through a window at the rear of the house that Baxter would leave ajar. Dunn knew that since Baxter lived alone, there was no possibility that he might find someone within the house when he arrived at the appointed time. Dunn arrived at the location at approximately 9 p.m., but due to the darkness of the evening and the fact that all of the homes in the development looked the same, he mistakenly entered the house belonging to Baxter's neighbor. He found a window ajar at the rear of the neighbor's home and pushed it open. He entered and took the neighbor's television set and stereo. When he returned to the bar where Baxter was waiting for him, both men were arrested by the police. If Baxter and Dunn are tried for conspiracy, the court will most likely find them:
Options:
A. Not guilty, because Dunn failed to take Baxter's property.
B. Not guilty, because Dunn, being in the wrong house, could not take Baxter's property.
C. Guilty, because they actually took the neighbor's property.
D. Guilty, because they intentionally agreed to defraud the insurance company. | D |
Pike sued Digger, the contractor who constructed Pike's house, for breach of warranty of habitability. At trial, in cross-examination of Pike, Digger's attorney asked whether Pike had sued another contractor 30 years earlier, claiming similar defects in another house built for Pike. The question was not objected to and Pike answered that she had had some "water problems" with the first house she ever purchased, but no suit was filed. Digger then called Wirth, the contractor of 30 years earlier, to testify that Pike had brought suit against Wirth for defects in the earlier house, many of which were like those now claimed to be found in the home Digger built, but that the case was settled without trial. The trial court should rule Wirth's offered testimony:
Options:
A. Admissible as proper impeachment since Pike will have an opportunity to deny or explain Wirth's statement.
B. Admissible, because Pike failed to object to Digger's questions on cross-examination relative to the prior suit.
C. Inadmissible, because the best evidence of the former suit is the court record.
D. Inadmissible, because its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger that it will confuse the issues and waste time. | D |
Argus Corporation is privately owned and incorporated in the state of Kiowa. It contracted with the United States to construct a dam across the Big Sandy River in the state of Arapahoe. The state of Arapahoe imposed a gross receipts tax on all business conducted within the state. Arapahoe sued Argus Corporation to collect that tax on the receipts Argus received under this federal contract. No federal statutes or administrative rules are applicable, and the contract between the United States and the Argus Corporation does not mention state taxation. The court should hold the state tax, as applied here, to be:
Options:
A. Constitutional, because a state has exclusive jurisdiction over all commercial transactions executed wholly within its borders.
B. Constitutional, because private contractors performing work under a federal contract are not immune in these circumstances from nondiscriminatory state taxation.
C. Unconstitutional, because it violates the Supremacy Clause.
D. Unconstitutional, because it imposes an undue burden on interstate commerce. | B |
A state penal statute makes it a misdemeanor to "willfully shut off the gas, electricity, or any other form of power for cooking, heating, or illumination to an inhabited dwelling" unless strictly outlined procedures for notice and hearing are met. Shelley owned several small, single-family residences in City, which she rented to various student groups and families. One such rental, a small, furnished two-bedroom house located in one of the poorer sections of City, had been rented to a young married couple for several months when Shelley failed to receive the monthly rent check. She drove by the house several times for two weeks and received no answer to her knocks. Neighbors told her that they had not seen the couple for at least three weeks. Finally, Shelley used her keys to enter the house. She discovered that the old set of dishware and utensils she had permitted the couple to use was still in the kitchen, but that there was no food in the house and all but a few old items of clothing had been removed from the closets. Concluding that the couple had abandoned the rental without paying the last month's rent, Shelley called the power company and had the electricity and gas shut off until she could find another tenant. A week later, the couple returned from an extended visit to the young wife's sick mother in Mexico. When they found that their power had been turned off, they reported this to the authorities and Shelley was prosecuted under the misdemeanor statute. At trial, it was established that the couple had inadvertently failed to place the proper postage on the rent check, which they had mailed from Mexico, and it had eventually been returned by Mexican postal authorities to the wife's mother's residence. Shelley will probably be:
Options:
A. Convicted, because the charged crime is violation of a public safety statute, and she is strictly liable for her action in turning off the power.
B. Convicted, because she did not undertake a more thorough inquiry or wait a more reasonable length of time before concluding that the house had been abandoned.
C. Acquitted, if the trier of fact concludes that Shelley was reasonable in believing that the house had been abandoned.
D. Acquitted, if the trier of fact concludes that the young couple was negligent in not placing proper postage on the rent check mailed from Mexico. | C |
Sam was a famous auto racer and builder of racing cars. He and Bob signed a contract for sale of one of Sam's hand-built race cars for $ 25,000$, the price to be paid and the car to be delivered one week later. The day after the contract was signed, Sam called Bob and told him that Sam's wife, Winnie, who had a half interest in the race car, would not go along with the sale at $ 25,000$. Winnie would agree to a sale for $ 40,000$. If Winnie in fact has a half interest in the racing car:
Options:
A. There is no enforceable contract because the car cannot be sold unless both owners convey title.
B. There is an enforceable contract only if Bob was unaware of Winnie's interest when he signed with Sam.
C. There is an enforceable contract regardless of whether Bob was aware of Winnie's interest at the time he signed.
D. The contract is discharged by prospective inability of performance. | C |
Jack, a 17-year-old high school student living at home with his parents, decided one day to try the old practical joke he had seen so many times on television and in movies where a bucket of water is balanced on a partially open door so that the next person to enter the room through that door is drenched. Knowing that his parents were giving a dinner party that evening, Jack obtained a bucket from the tool shed, filled it with ice water, and balanced it on the partially open door of the guest bedroom, knowing that his father would take the guests' coats and wraps in there and toss them on the bed. Later that evening, Walt, an invited guest of Jack's parents, mistakenly wandered into the guest bedroom in search of the bathroom. Jack's father had decided to keep all the guests' coats in the hall closet, since there were only three couples coming to dinner. As Walt opened the door to the guest bedroom, the bucket of ice water plunged down upon him, opening a four-inch cut in his scalp. Walt was rushed to the hospital, where 12 stitches were required to close the head wound. Assume for the purposes of this question only that the jury believes Jack's testimony that he did not mean to hurt anyone, and did not expect anyone other than his father to enter the room where the bucket trap was set. Jack may be held liable for:
Options:
A. Negligence only.
B. Negligence and recklessness only.
C. Negligence, recklessness, and battery.
D. Battery only. | C |
Police investigating a homicide had probable cause to believe that Drake had committed it. They then learned from a reliable informant that, a short while ago, Drake had gone to Trent's house to obtain a false driver's license from Trent, a convicted forger. Believing that Drake might still be there, the police, without obtaining a warrant, went to Trent's house. They entered the house and found Drake hiding in the basement. He was arrested and given his Miranda warnings. At the police station, he confessed to the homicide. At a preliminary hearing, Drake's attorney contends that the confession should be suppressed on Fourth Amendment grounds. Is the court likely to agree?
Options:
A. Yes, because the police did not have a search warrant to enter Trent's house and there were no exigent circumstances.
B. Yes, because the police did not have an arrest warrant for Drake and there were no exigent circumstances.
C. No, because a reliable informant told police that Drake was in Trent's house.
D. No, because the police had probable cause to arrest Drake. | D |
Smythe was charged with the murder of his wife. In his defense, he testified that, at the time he killed her, he believed that his wife was planning to destroy the world by detonating a massive explosive device that she had developed and built in the basement of their home. He further testified that he had tried many times to dissuade his wife from her plan and had tried to destroy devices that she stored in the basement. She had, he testified, foiled his efforts by, on two occasions, signing papers for his hospitalization, which lasted for a brief period each time. He said that he had concluded that the only way to prevent her scheme was to kill her and that he had become so obsessed with the importance of doing so that he could think of nothing else. One day when he saw her open the door to the basement, he lunged at her and pushed her down the steps to her death. The best defense raised by Smythe's testimony is:
Options:
A. Lack of the requisite mental element.
B. Lack of the requisite act element.
C. Insanity.
D. Belief that the situation justified his actions. | C |
Pitt sued Dow for damages for injuries that Pitt incurred when a badly rotted limb fell from a curbside tree in front of Dow's home and hit Pitt. Dow claimed that the tree was on city property and thus was the responsibility of the city. At trial, Pitt offered testimony that, a week after the accident, Dow had cut the tree down with a chainsaw. The offered evidence is:
Options:
A. Inadmissible, because there is a policy to encourage safety precautions.
B. Inadmissible, because it is irrelevant to the condition of the tree at the time of the accident.
C. Admissible to show the tree was on Dow's property.
D. Admissible to show the tree was in a rotted condition. | C |
A grand jury was investigating a bank robbery. The only information known to the prosecutor was a rumor that Taylor might have been involved. The grand jury subpoenaed Taylor. He refused to answer questions about the robbery and was granted use immunity. He then testified that he and Simmons had robbed the bank. The grand jury indicted both Taylor and Simmons for the bank robbery. The prosecutor permitted Simmons to enter a plea to a lesser offense in exchange for Simmons's agreement to testify against Taylor. The prosecutor had no evidence as to the identity of the robbers except the testimony of Simmons and Taylor. At Taylor's trial, his objection to Simmons's being permitted to testify should be:
Options:
A. Sustained, because the prosecutor may not bargain away the rights of one co-defendant in a deal with another.
B. Sustained, because Simmons's testimony was acquired as a result of Taylor's grand jury testimony.
C. Overruled, because the police suspected Taylor even before he testified in the grand jury hearing.
D. Overruled, because a witness cannot be precluded from testifying if his testimony is given voluntarily. | B |
A state statute provides that persons moving into a community to attend a college on a fulltime basis may not vote in any elections for local or state officials that are held in that community. Instead, the statute provides that for voting purposes all such persons shall retain their residence in the community from which they came. In that state the age of majority is 18 . Which of the following is the strongest argument to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of this state statute?
Options:
A. A state does not have an interest that is sufficiently compelling to justify the exclusion from voting of an entire class of persons.
B. There are less restrictive means by which the state could assure that only actual residents of a community vote in its elections.
C. Most persons moving to a community to attend college full-time are likely to have attained the age of majority under the laws of this state.
D. On its face this statute impermissibly discriminates against interstate commerce. | B |
In which of the following situations is Defendant least likely to be guilty of burglary in a jurisdiction that has extended burglary to buildings other than dwellings but otherwise retains the common law requirements?
Options:
A. Defendant posed as a member of a cleaning crew so that a security guard would give him access to a department store after it was closed for the night, and then hid in a storage closet until the cleaning crew left. He then stole a quantity of jewelry from several jewelry cases, and forced open a loading dock door to escape from the building.
B. Defendant, intending to steal money and valuables from a house he believed was unoccupied for the evening, pushed open a mail slot and reached his hand in to try to unlock the front door. The owners' dog bit Defendant's hand and he immediately pulled it out and fled.
C. Defendant was owed $ 500$ by Victor, his bookie. While Victor was out of town one night, Defendant went to Victor's house to get his money, because he knew that Victor had $ 500$ in cash in a desk drawer and the debt was long overdue. Defendant opened an unlocked window and entered the house. He could not find the cash, so he decided to take a painting that he knew was worth substantially more than $ 500$. He later sold it for $ 1,000$ and kept the proceeds.
D. Defendant, a security officer in a housing project, saw Von, who was wanted on a warrant for drug dealing, through a window of an apartment one evening. He fired his gun at Von from the sidewalk, intending to injure him, although Defendant knew that he was not legally authorized to use deadly force in that situation. The bullet went through the window and missed Von, lodging in a wall behind him. | C |
Cars driven by Pugh and Davidson collided, and Davidson was charged with driving while intoxicated in connection with the accident. She pleaded guilty and was merely fined, although, under the statute, the court could have sentenced her to two years in prison. Thereafter, Pugh, alleging that Davidson's intoxication had caused the collision, sued Davidson for damages. At trial, Pugh offers the properly authenticated record of Davidson's conviction. The record should be:
Options:
A. Admitted as proof of Davidson's character.
B. Admitted as proof of Davidson's intoxication.
C. Excluded, because the conviction was not the result of a trial.
D. Excluded, because it is hearsay not within any exception. | B |
Cantebury Trails operated a fleet of touring buses. It owned its own garage for repairing and maintaining its fleet. Behind this garage was a large vacant lot in which Cantebury Trails stored old, discarded, and wrecked buses, which it salvaged for parts or sold for scrap. This area was fenced in by a five-foot high chain link fence, but Cantebury was aware that children from the neighborhood would climb the fence and play among the junked buses. Consequently, Cantebury Trails would have one of its employees walk through the storage area sometime during the day to chase away any children who may have scaled the fence. One Saturday afternoon, when Cantebury Trails' garage had closed for the weekend, a group of children climbed over the storage area's fence to play army among the junked buses. One of the children, Donny (who had been chased away from the lot before and who also had been warned by his parents not to play in these buses), was trying to climb on the roof of one of the old buses, when he slipped on the front bumper of the bus and his arm broke through the front windshield. As a result of this accident, Donny severed the tendon and nerves in his right arm, leaving it permanently disabled. Through an appropriate guardian, Donny brought suit against Cantebury Trails for his injury. Which of the following, if established, would most aid Donny in showing that Cantebury Trails breached a duty owing to him?
Options:
A. It would have been economically feasible to remove the windows from all the abandoned buses.
B. This area would be classified more as a residential neighborhood than an industrial area.
C. Cantebury Trails could have eliminated the risk of injury without unduly interfering with its normal operations.
D. Cantebury Trails improperly maintained the fence that surrounded the lot with the discarded and abandoned buses. | C |
Dillon held up a gasoline station. During the robbery he shot and killed a customer who attempted to apprehend him. Dillon was prosecuted for premeditated murder and convicted. Thereafter, he was indicted for armed robbery of the station. Before the trial, his attorney moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that further proceedings were unconstitutional because of Dillon's prior conviction. The motion to dismiss should be:
Options:
A. Granted, because once Dillon was convicted on any of the charges arising out of the robbery, the prosecution was constitutionally estopped from proceeding against Dillon on any charge stemming from the same transaction.
B. Granted, because the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits a subsequent trial on what is essentially a lesser included offense.
C. Denied, because there is no constitutional requirement that all known charges against Dillon be brought in the same prosecution.
D. Denied, because estoppel does not apply when the defendant is charged with violating two different statutes. | C |
A state statute provides that only citizens of the United States may be employed by that state. In an action brought in a federal court, a resident alien who was prevented from obtaining state employment as a garbage collector solely because of his alien status challenged the statute's constitutionality as applied to his circumstances. Which of the following statements concerning the burden of persuasion applicable to this suit is correct?
Options:
A. The alien must demonstrate that there is no rational relationship between the citizenship requirement and any legitimate state interest.
B. The alien must demonstrate that the citizenship requirement is not necessary to advance an important state interest.
C. The state must demonstrate that there is a rational relationship between the citizenship requirement and a legitimate state interest.
D. The state must demonstrate that the citizenship requirement is necessary to advance a compelling state interest. | D |
Dietz and Atkins worked together as pickpockets. Dietz approached Verner from the front to distract him, holding a small camera and asking him to take a picture, while Atkins came up from behind with a knife to slice open Verner's back pocket of his pants and remove his wallet. Verner was drunk and believed Dietz had a gun and was trying to rob him, but was unaware of Atkins behind him. Verner reached into his back pocket to hand over his wallet and was cut by Atkins's knife as it was slicing through his pocket. The wallet dropped to the ground as Verner clutched his hand. Atkins picked it up and Dietz and Atkins fled while Verner knelt on the ground in pain. Dietz was apprehended shortly thereafter and charged with robbery. Should Dietz be found guilty?
Options:
A. Yes, because Atkins obtained the property by means of force.
B. Yes, because Verner believed that Dietz would shoot him if he did not give up his wallet.
C. No, because neither Dietz nor Atkins intended to use force against Verner to obtain the property.
D. No, because Verner's belief that Dietz was robbing him was unreasonable. | A |
Parmott sued Dexter in an automobile collision case. At trial, Parmott wishes to show by extrinsic evidence that Wade, Dexter's primary witness, is Dexter's partner in a gambling operation. This evidence is:
Options:
A. Admissible as evidence of Wade's character.
B. Admissible as evidence of Wade's possible bias in favor of Dexter.
C. Inadmissible, because criminal conduct can be shown only by admission or record of conviction.
D. Inadmissible, because bias must be shown on cross-examination and not by extrinsic evidence. | B |
Rogers gave Mitchell a power of attorney containing the following provision: My attorney, Mitchell, is specifically authorized to sell and convey any part or all of my real property. Mitchell conveyed part of Rogers's land to Stone by deed in the customary form containing covenants of title. Stone sues Rogers for breach of a covenant. The outcome of Stone's suit will be governed by whether:
Options:
A. Deeds without covenants are effective to convey realty.
B. The jurisdiction views the covenants as personal or running with the land.
C. Stone is a bona fide purchaser.
D. The power to "sell and convey" is construed to include the power to execute the usual form of deed used to convey realty. | D |
Leonard was the high priest of a small cult of Satan worshippers living in New Arcadia. As a part of the practice of their religious beliefs, a cat was required to be sacrificed to the glory of Satan after a live dissection of the animal in which it endured frightful pain. In the course of such a religious sacrifice, Leonard was arrested on the complaint of the local Humane Society and charged under a statute punishing cruelty to animals. On appeal, a conviction of Leonard probably will be:
Options:
A. Sustained, on the grounds that belief in or worship of Satan does not enjoy constitutional protection.
B. Sustained, on the grounds that sincere religious belief is not an adequate defense on these facts.
C. Overturned, on the grounds that the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion and its expression was violated.
D. Overturned, on the grounds that the beliefs of the cult members in the need for the sacrifice might be reasonable, and their act was religious. | B |
Johnson and Tenniel owned Brownacre as joint tenants with the right of survivorship. Johnson executed a mortgage on Brownacre to Lowden to secure a loan. Subsequently, but before the indebtedness was paid to Lowden, Johnson died intestate with Stokes as her only heir at law. The jurisdiction in which Brownacre is located recognizes the title theory of mortgages. In an appropriate action, the court should determine that title to Brownacre is vested:
Options:
A. In Tenniel, with the entire interest subject to the mortgage.
B. In Tenniel, free and clear of the mortgage.
C. Half in Tenniel, free of the mortgage, and half in Stokes subject to the mortgage.
D. Half in Tenniel and half in Stokes, with both subject to the mortgage. | C |
Darren's car was stopped by Officer Jones for a minor traffic violation. The officer recognized Darren as a suspect in a multimillion-dollar bank fraud scheme that had just been discovered by the authorities. She placed Darren under arrest and gave him Miranda warnings. She then asked for permission to search the trunk of the car. Darren nodded and unlocked the trunk. Officer Jones searched the trunk and discovered a bag containing what appeared to be cocaine in a compartment in the trunk. When later tests determined that it was cocaine, the authorities added a charge of transporting illegal narcotics to Darren's indictment. At a preliminary hearing, Darren moved to have evidence of the cocaine excluded as the result of a search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Should the court grant Darren's motion?
Options:
A. Yes, because one taken into custody cannot give valid consent to a search that would otherwise require a warrant.
B. Yes, because the search exceeded the scope of a permissible search incident to a lawful arrest.
C. No, if the court finds that Darren's consent was voluntary under the circumstances.
D. No, because persons have a lesser expectation of privacy in their vehicles for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. | C |
Barnes had been a beekeeper for many years, making a modest living selling honey in the area surrounding his farm. When he became aware of a sudden demand for beeswax for use in the manufacture of candles and certain types of exotic soaps sold in specialty shops, he built a plant to manufacture these items. The candle and soap business developed so rapidly that Barnes found it profitable to sell his bee farm to Stevens for $ 50,000$. The sale contract provided that "Barnes reserves the right to purchase all of the beeswax produced by Stevens during the next five years at the current market price at time of delivery, delivery and payment to be made at weekly intervals, and Stevens agrees to supply in any event a minimum of 100 pounds of beeswax per month during that period."' When the sale was closed, Barnes's lawyer handed Stevens's lawyer a letter stating: "This is to notify you that I will take all of your beeswax production until further notice."' For one year, Stevens delivered to Barnes and Barnes paid for all of the beeswax produced by Stevens. During that year, Stevens, who was an expert beekeeper, increased his beeswax production by $100 \%$ by increasing the number and productivity of the bees. Stevens then proposed to Barnes that, since he had doubled production, it would only be fair that he supply Barnes with half of his new total, but in any event a minimum of 100 pounds per month, leaving Stevens free to sell the remainder of the wax at higher prices for new uses being made of beeswax. Barnes, in a signed writing, agreed to the proposal by Stevens for the remaining period of the original contract. During the following year, Stevens delivered to Barnes, and Barnes paid for, one-half of all of the beeswax produced by Stevens. As the first year of the new contract ended, Stevens was stung by a bee and, due to an allergy, became so seriously and permanently ill and impaired as to be unable to attend to the bees. From that time on he never made another delivery to Barnes. Jones offered to testify that he looked up Smith's telephone number in the directory, called that number, and that a voice answered, "This is Smith speaking." At this, Jones asked, "Was that your horse that tramped across my cornfield this afternoon?" The voice replied, "Yes." The judge should rule the testimony:
Options:
A. Admissible, because the answering speaker's identification of himself, together with the usual accuracy of the telephone directory and transmission system, furnishes sufficient authentication.
B. Admissible, because judicial notice may be taken of the accuracy of telephone directories.
C. Inadmissible unless Jones can further testify that he was familiar with Smith's voice and that it was in fact Smith to whom he spoke.
D. Inadmissible unless Smith has first been asked whether or not the conversation took place and has been given the opportunity to admit, deny, or explain. | A |
Congress provides by statute that any state that fails to prohibit automobile speeds of over 55 miles per hour on highways within the state shall be denied federal highway construction funding. The state of Atlantic, one of the richest and most highway-oriented states in the country, refuses to enact such a statute. Which of the following potential plaintiffs is most likely to be able to obtain a judicial determination of the validity of this federal statute?
Options:
A. A taxpayer of the United States and the state of Atlantic who wants his state to get its fair share of his tax monies for highways, and fears that, if it does not, his state taxes will be increased to pay for the highway construction in the state of Atlantic that federal funds would have financed.
B. Contractors who have been awarded contracts by the state of Atlantic for specified highway construction projects, which contracts are contingent on payment to the state of the federal funds to which it would otherwise be entitled.
C. An automobile owner who lives in the state of Atlantic and regularly uses its highway system.
D. An organization dedicated to keeping the federal government within the powers granted it by the Constitution. | B |
Paul sued Dave for making a slanderous statement that greatly embarrassed Paul. Dave denied that he ever made such a statement. At trial, Paul called Willie to the stand, and Willie testified that he heard Dave make the statement on August 4. Dave discredited Willie, and Park offers evidence of Willie's good reputation for truthfulness. The rehabilitation is most likely to be permitted if the discrediting evidence by Dave was testimony that:
Options:
A. Willie and Paul had known each other since childhood.
B. Willie had been convicted of perjury in an unrelated case.
C. Willie had attended a school for mentally retarded children.
D. Willie disliked Dave. | B |
All lawyers practicing in the state of Erewhon must be members of the State Bar Association, by order of the state supreme court. Several state officials serve on the Bar Association's Board of Bar Governors. The Board of Bar Governors authorizes the payment of dues for two staff members to the Cosmopolitan Club, a private dining club licensed to sell alcoholic beverages. The Cosmopolitan Club is frequented by affluent businessmen and professionals and by legislators. It is generally known that the purpose of the membership of the Bar Association staff is to enable them to go where members of the "elite" meet and to lobby for legislation in which the Bar Association is interested. The State Association has numerous committees and subcommittees concerned with family law, real estate law, unauthorized practice, etc., and its recommendations often influence state policy. Some committee meetings are held at the Cosmopolitan Club. The club is known to have rules which restrict membership by race, religion, and sex. Plaintiffs, husband and wife, who are members of the Erewhon Bar Association, petition the Board of Bar Governors to adopt a resolution prohibiting the payment of club dues to and the holding of meetings of the Bar Association or its committees at places that discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or sex. After substantial public discussion, the Board of Bar Governors, by a close vote, fails to pass such a resolution. These events receive extensive coverage in the local newspapers. Plaintiffs bring an action in federal court seeking an injunction against such payments and the holding of meetings in such places as the Cosmopolitan Club. The strongest argument for Plaintiffs is:
Options:
A. Private rights to discriminate and associate freely must defer to a public interest against discrimination on the basis of race, religion, or sex.
B. The failure of the State Bar Association to pass a resolution forbidding discrimination on the basis of race, religion, or sex constitutes a denial of equal protection.
C. The State Bar Association is an agency of the state and its payment of dues to such private clubs promotes discrimination on the basis of race, religion, and sex.
D. The State Bar Association's payment of dues to such private clubs promotes discrimination on the basis of race, religion, and sex. | C |
Ortega owned Blackacre in fee simple and by his will specifically devised Blackacre as follows: "To my daughter, Eugenia, her heirs and assigns, but if Eugenia dies survived by a husband, a child or children, then to Eugenia's husband during his lifetime with remainder to Eugenia's children, their heirs and assigns. Specifically provided, however, that if Eugenia dies survived by a husband and no child, Blackacre is specifically devised to my nephew, Luis, his heirs and assigns." While Ortega's will was in probate, Luis quitclaimed all his interest in Blackacre to Eugenia's husband, Jose. Three years later Eugenia died, survived by Jose but no children. Eugenia left a will devising her interest in Blackacre to Jose. The only applicable statute provides that any interest in land is freely alienable. Luis instituted an appropriate action against Jose to establish title to Blackacre. Judgment should be for:
Options:
A. Luis, because his quitclaim deed did not transfer his after-acquired title.
B. Luis, because Jose took nothing under Ortega's will.
C. Jose, because Luis had effectively conveyed his interest to Jose.
D. Jose, because the doctrine of after-acquired title applies to a devise by will. | C |
Defendant, a worker in a metal working shop, had long been teasing Vincent, a young colleague, by calling him insulting names and ridiculing him. One day Vincent responded to the teasing by picking up a metal bar and attacking Defendant. Defendant could have escaped from the shop. He parried the blow with his left arm, and with his right hand struck Vincent a blow on his jaw from which the young man died. What is the most serious offense of which Defendant could be properly convicted?
Options:
A. Involuntary manslaughter.
B. Voluntary manslaughter.
C. Murder.
D. None of the above. | D |
Three states, East Winnetka, Midland, and West Hampton, are located next to one another in that order. The states of East Winnetka and West Hampton permit the hunting and trapping of snipe, but the state of Midland strictly forbids it in order to protect snipe, a rare species of animal, from extinction. The state of Midland has a state statute that provides, "Possession of snipe traps is prohibited. Any game warden finding a snipe trap within the state shall seize and destroy it." Snipe traps cost about $ 15$ each. Prentis is a resident of West Hampton and an ardent snipe trapper. She drove her car to East Winnetka to purchase a new improved snipe trap from a manufacturer there. In the course of her trip back across Midland with the trap in her car, Prentis stopped in a Midland state park to camp for a few nights. While she was in that park, a Midland game warden saw the trap, which was visible on the front seat of her car. The warden seized the trap and destroyed it in accordance with the Midland statute after Prentis admitted that the seized item was a prohibited snipe trap. No federal statutes or federal administrative regulations apply. For this question only, assume that a valid federal administrative rule, adopted under a federal consumer product safety act, regulates the design of snipe traps. The rule was issued to prevent traps from causing injury to human beings, e.g., by pinching fingers while persons were setting the traps. No other federal law applies. Which of the following best states the effect of the federal rule on the Midland state statute?
Options:
A. The federal rule preempts the Midland state statute, because the federal rule regulates the same subject mattersnipe traps.
B. The federal rule preempts the Midland state statute, because the federal rule does not contain affirmative authorization for continued state regulation.
C. The federal rule does not preempt the Midland state statute, because the Midland state statute regulates wild animals, a field of exclusive state power.
D. The federal rule does not preempt the Midland state statute, because the purposes of the federal rule and the Midland state statute are different. | D |
Hammond decided to kill his wife by poisoning her. He asked his friend, Jordan, a pharmacist, to obtain some curare, a deadly poison, and to give it to him without recording the transaction. Because Jordan suspected Hammond's motive, she supplied Hammond with a small quantity of Marvane, an antibiotic, instead of curare. Marvane is harmless if administered in small quantities, except for the less than $1 \%$ of the population who are allergic to the drug. Hammond injected his wife with the Marvane while she slept. She was allergic to the drug and died from the injection. Jordan was distraught and confessed the entire affair to the police, explaining that she had failed to report Hammond's conduct to the authorities because she feared that it would end their friendship if she did. In a common law jurisdiction, Hammond is guilty of:
Options:
A. Murder only.
B. Murder and conspiracy.
C. Attempted murder only.
D. Attempted murder and conspiracy. | A |
One night after work, Dunken stopped in at a bar next to his place of employment to have a few drinks before heading home. While there, he became intoxicated. Upon leaving the bar, Dunken decided that he would drive home rather than walk. Dunken went next door to a used car lot to take a car to drive home. However, Dunken discovered that there were no keys in any of the cars. He then broke into the main office of the used car lot where he surmised correctly that the keys would be kept. As he left the office with keys to one of the cars, Dunken saw a security guard coming toward him. Dunken pushed the guard to the side as he ran past. The guard fell back, hit his head on the pavement, and died. Dunken then climbed into the car and drove away. On his way home, he was so intoxicated that he missed his exit. Making an illegal u-turn to go back, he struck a car legally parked on the side of the road, killing its occupant. Relevant statutes extend burglary to include buildings not used as a dwelling. First degree murder is defined as "the premeditated and intentional killing of another or a killing during commission of a rape, robbery, burglary, or arson." Second degree murder is defined as all murders that are not first degree murder. The Sisters of Charity's interest can best be described as:
Options:
A. A contingent remainder.
B. A vested remainder subject to total divestment.
C. An executory interest.
D. Nothing. | D |
The state of Floribama has recently had a problem with people dealing in, and with, its booming garment industry. The use of independent contractors by major garment makers, most of whom were headquartered out of state, had led to the hiring of illegal aliens to work under conditions reminiscent of 19 th century sweatshops. The legislature of Floribama enacted a statute to remedy the situation and to protect its citizens against the problems in the future. The statute provides: I. That all garment makers must be licensed by the state attorney general. II. That all subcontractors (defined separately in the statute) must be separately licensed by the attorney general and must have been a citizen of the United States for five years and a resident of Floribama for one year. For this question only, assume that Ohner and Byer were bound by a contract for the sale of lot 101 for $ 5,000$, that on May 3 Ohner telephoned Byer and stated that because he had just discovered that a shopping center was going to be erected adjacent to the Grove subdivision, he would "need to have $ 6,000$ for each of the lots including lot $101, "$ that Byer thereupon agreed to pay him $ 6,000$ for lot 101 , and that on May 6, Byer telegraphed, "Accept your offer with respect to the rest of the lots." Assuming that two contracts were formed and that there is no controlling statute, Byer will most likely be required to pay:
Options:
A. Only $ 5,000$ for each of the 50 lots.
B. Only $ 5,000$ for lot 101 , but $ 6,000$ for the remaining 49 lots.
C. $ 6,000$ for each of the 50 lots. | B |
Farquart had made a legally binding promise to furnish his son Junior and Junior's fiancee a house on their wedding day, planned for June 10 of the following year. Pursuant to that promise, Farquart telephoned his old contractor-friend Sawtooth and made the following oral agreement-each making full and accurate written notes thereof: Sawtooth was to cut 30 trees into fireplace logs from a specified portion of a certain one-acre plot owned by Farquart, and Farquart was to pay therefor $ 20$ per tree. Sawtooth agreed further to build a house on the plot conforming to the specifications of Plan OP5 published by Builders, Inc. for a construction price of $ 18,000$. Farquart agreed to make payments of $ 2,000$ on the first of every month for nine months beginning August 1 upon monthly presentation of a certificate by Builders, Inc. that the specifications of Plan OP5 were being met. Sawtooth delivered the cut logs to Farquart in July, when he also began building the house. Farquart made three $ 2,000$ payments for the work done in July, August, and September, without requiring a certificate. Sawtooth worked through October, but no work was done from November 1 to the end of February because of bad weather; and Farquart made no payments during that period. Sawtooth did not object. On March 1, Sawtooth demanded payment of $ 2,000$; but Farquart refused on the grounds that no construction work had been done for four months and Builders had issued no certificate. Sawtooth thereupon abandoned work and repudiated the agreement. What was the probable legal effect of the following? I. Sawtooth's failure to object to Farquart's making no payments on November 1, December 1, January 1 , and February 1. II. Farquart's making payments in August through October without requiring a certificate from Builders.
Options:
A. Estoppel-type waiver as to both I. and II.
B. Waiver of delay in payment as to I. and revocable waiver as to II.
C. Mutual rescission of the contract by I. combined with II.
D. Discharge of Farquart's duty to make the four payments as to I. and estoppel-type waiver as to II. | B |
A federal statute requires United States civil service employees to retire at age 75 . However, that statute also states that civil service employees of the armed forces must retire at age 65 . Prentis, a 65-year-old civil service employee of the Department of the Army, seeks a declaratory judgment that would forbid his mandatory retirement until age 75 . The strongest argument that Prentis can make to invalidate the requirement that he retire at age 65 is that the law:
Options:
A. Denies him a privilege or immunity of national citizenship.
B. Deprives him of a property right without just compensation.
C. Is not within the scope of any of the enumerated powers of Congress in Article I, Section 8.
D. Invidiously discriminates against him on the basis of age in violation of the Fifth Amendment. | D |
The President of the United States recognizes the country of Ruritania and undertakes diplomatic relations with its government through the Secretary of State. Ruritania is governed by a repressive totalitarian government. In an appropriate federal court, Dunn brings a suit against the President and Secretary of State to set aside this action on the ground that it is inconsistent with the principles of our constitutional form of government. Dunn has a lucrative contract with the United States Department of Commerce to provide commercial information about Ruritania. The contract expressly terminates, however, "when the President recognizes the country of Ruritania and undertakes diplomatic relations with its government." Which of the following is the most proper disposition of the Dunn suit by the federal court?
Options:
A. Suit dismissed, because Dunn does not have standing to bring this action.
B. Suit dismissed, because there is no adversity between Dunn and the defendants.
C. Suit dismissed, because it presents a nonjusticiable political question.
D. Suit decided on the merits. | C |
Congress enacts a criminal statute prohibiting "any person from interfering in any way with any right conferred on another person by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." Application of this statute to Jones, a private citizen, would be most clearly constitutional if Jones, with threats of violence, coerces:
Options:
A. A public school teacher to exclude black pupils from her class, solely because of their race.
B. Black pupils, solely because of their race, to refrain from attending a privately owned and operated school licensed by the state.
C. The bus driver operating a free school bus service under the sponsorship of a local church to refuse to allow black pupils on the bus, solely because of their race.
D. The federal official in charge of distributing certain federal benefits directly to students from distributing them to black pupils, solely because of their race. | A |
Technix, Inc. produces the most up-to-date, high-speed mainframe computers on the market, and Cruncher Corporation is on the cutting edge of data storage technology. Technix and Cruncher contracted to purchase/sell a "Yellow Giant" computer. The written contract stated that Cruncher would purchase "one Technix 'Yellow Giant' computer at a price of $ 175,000$." At the time, the going price for Yellow Giant computers was $ 150,000$. When Technix delivered a Yellow Giant on the specified date, Cruncher refused to accept delivery and refused to pay. Technix sued Cruncher for breach, claiming that its expensive computers were manufactured to order and so it was forced to dispose of the Yellow Giant at a price far below fair market value. In defending the suit, Cruncher's president wishes to testify that Cruncher rejected the Yellow Giant because both parties knew that Cruncher really wanted a "Purple Giant," a machine much faster than the Yellow Giant, but which the parties agreed would be called in the contract a "Yellow Giant" to keep competitors in the dark as to Cruncher's new capabilities, and that the parties had executed contracts in the past that had specified a less powerful computer than the model that was actually delivered. Should the testimony of Cruncher's president be admitted?
Options:
A. Yes, because Cruncher is entitled to reformation of the contract.
B. Yes, because the president's testimony would explain the meaning of a disputed contract term.
C. No, because the parol evidence rule applies and the president's testimony contradicts a term in the written contract.
D. No, because the Statute of Frauds applies, since the contract is for a large amount of money. | B |
Which of the following is least likely to be the underlying felony in a prosecution for felony murder?
Options:
A. Arson.
B. Manslaughter.
C. Attempted rape.
D. Burglary. | B |
Potts, a building contractor, sued Dennis for failure to pay on a small cost-plus construction contract. At trial, Potts, who personally supervised all of the work, seeks to testify to what he remembers about the amount of pipe used, the number of workers used on the job, and the number of hours spent grading. Dennis objects on the ground that Potts had routinely recorded these facts in notebooks which are in Potts's possession. Potts's testimony is:
Options:
A. Admissible as a report of regularly conducted business activity.
B. Admissible as based on firsthand knowledge.
C. Inadmissible, because it violates the best evidence rule.
D. Inadmissible, because a summary of writings cannot be made unless the originals are available for examination. | B |
Fernwood Realty Company developed a residential development, known as the Fernwood Development, which included single-family dwellings, town houses, and high-rise apartments for a total of 25,000 dwelling units. Included in the deed to each unit was a covenant under which the grantee and the grantee's "heirs and assigns" agreed to purchase electrical power only from a plant Fernwood promised to build and maintain within the development. Fernwood constructed the plant and the necessary power lines. The plant did not supply power outside the development. An appropriate and fair formula was used to determine price. After constructing and selling 12,500 of the units, Fernwood sold its interest in the development to Gaint Realty Investors. Gaint operated the power plant and constructed and sold the remaining 12,500 units. Each conveyance from Gaint contained the same covenant relating to electrical power that Fernwood had included in the 12,500 conveyances it had made. Page bought a dwelling unit from Olm, who had purchased it from Fernwood. Subsequently, Page, whose lot was along the boundary of the Fernwood development, ceased buying electrical power from Gaint and began purchasing power from General Power Company, which provided such service in the area surrounding the Fernwood development. Both General Power and Gaint have governmental authorization to provide electrical services to the area. Gaint instituted an appropriate action against Page to enjoin her from obtaining electrical power from General Power. If judgment is for Page, it most likely will be because:
Options:
A. The covenant does not touch and concern the land.
B. The mixture of types of residential units is viewed as preventing one common development scheme.
C. The covenant is a restraint on alienation.
D. There is no privity of estate between Page and Gaint. | A |
Pullen used aluminum brackets in her business. On the telephone listed as hers in the telephone book, Pullen received a call in which the caller said, "This is John Denison of Denison Hardware Company. We have a special on aluminum brackets this week at $30 \%$ off." Pullen ordered brackets from the caller. When the brackets were never delivered, Pullen sued Denison for breach of contract. At trial, Denison, who denies having made the telephone call, objects to Pullen's testimony concerning it. When asked, Pullen testifies that, aside from the telephone call, she had never heard Denison speak until she met him in the judge's chambers before the trial and that, in her opinion, the voice on the telephone was Denison's. The strongest argument for admission of Pullen's testimony concerning the telephone call is that:
Options:
A. The call related to business reasonably transacted over the telephone.
B. The call was received at a number assigned to Pullen by the telephone company.
C. After hearing Denison speak in chambers, Pullen recognized Denison's voice as that of the person on the telephone.
D. Self-identification is sufficient authentication of a telephone call. | C |
Ben contracted to buy Woodacre, a parcel of land, from Owen, with deed to be delivered and money paid on August 1 . Ben planned to build a high-rise building on Woodacre. Ben had visually inspected the land, but did not take any special notice of the fact that a stream flowed up to the eastern property line of Woodacre and reappeared just beyond the western property line. In fact, there was a conduit under the surface of Woodacre through which the waters of the stream were diverted. On July 28 , one of Ben's friends mentioned the existence of the conduit to Ben. Ben was amazed, and when Owen tendered a deed to Woodacre on August 1, Ben refused to accept it, stating, "I wouldn't have tried to buy Woodacre if I'd known about that conduit." Owen files suit, demanding performance by Ben or damages for breach. Who should prevail?
Options:
A. Owen, because Ben had ample opportunity to discover the existence of the conduit before he agreed to buy Woodacre.
B. Owen, because the purpose for which Ben intended to use Woodacre is irrelevant.
C. Ben, because Owen had a duty to provide a marketable title.
D. Ben, because of the doctrine of frustration of purpose. | A |
After being notified by Dr. Josephs that Nurse Norris's employment with his office was terminated, Norris applied for a position with Hospital. In her application, Norris listed her former employment with Josephs. Josephs, in response to a telephone inquiry from Hospital, stated that "Norris lacked professional competence." Although Josephs believed that to be a fair assessment of Norris, his adverse rating was based on one episode of malpractice for which he blamed Norris but which in fact was chargeable to another doctor. Because of Josephs's adverse comment on her qualifications, Norris was not employed by Hospital. If Norris asserts a claim based on defamation against Josephs, will Norris prevail?
Options:
A. Yes, because Josephs was mistaken in the facts on which he based his opinion of Norris's competence.
B. Yes, because Josephs's statement reflected adversely on Norris's professional competence.
C. No, if Norris authorized Hospital to make inquiry of her former employer.
D. No, if Josephs had reasonable grounds for his belief that Norris was not competent. | D |
Allen and Barker are equal tenants in common of a strip of land 10 feet wide and 100 feet deep which lies between the lots on which their respective homes are situated. Both Allen and Barker need the use of the 10 -foot strip as a driveway; and each fears that a new neighbor might seek partition and leave him with an unusable five-foot strip. The best measure to solve their problem is:
Options:
A. A covenant against partition.
B. An indenture granting cross-easements in the undivided half interest of each.
C. A partition into two separate five-foot-wide strips and an indenture granting crosseasements.
D. A trust to hold the strip in perpetuity. | C |
Pursuant to a state statute, Clovis applied for tuition assistance to attend the Institute of Liberal Arts. He was qualified for such assistance in every way except that he was a resident alien who did not intend to become a United States citizen. The state's restriction of such grants to United States citizens or resident aliens seeking such citizenship is probably:
Options:
A. Valid, because aliens are not per se "a discrete and insular minority" specially protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
B. Valid, because the line drawn by the state for extending aid was reasonably related to a legitimate state interest.
C. Invalid, because the justifications for this restriction are insufficient to overcome the burden imposed on a state when it uses such an alienage classification.
D. Invalid, because the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV does not permit such an arbitrary classification. | C |
Light Company is the sole distributor of electrical power in City. The company owns and maintains all of the electric poles and equipment in City. Light Company has complied with the National Electrical Safety Code, which establishes minimum requirements for the installation and maintenance of power poles. The Code has been approved by the federal and state governments. Light Company has had to replace insulators on its poles repeatedly because unknown persons repeatedly shoot at and destroy them. This causes the power lines to fall to the ground. On one of these occasions, Paul, Faber's five-yearold son, wandered out of Faber's yard, intentionally touched a downed wire, and was seriously burned. If a claim on Paul's behalf is asserted against Light Company, the probable result is that Paul will:
Options:
A. Recover if Light Company could have taken reasonable steps to prevent the lines from falling when the insulators were destroyed.
B. Recover, because a supplier of electricity is strictly liable in tort.
C. Not recover unless Light Company failed to exercise reasonable care to stop the destruction of the insulators.
D. Not recover, because the destruction of the insulators was intentional. | A |
Vincent was engaged in a telephone conversation with Walter. At one point in the conversation, Vincent said to Walter, "There's my doorbell. Hold the line a minute while I go see who it is." Two minutes later Vincent returned to the phone. He told Walter, "Dornbach is here. I'll have to hang up. Talk to you later." The next morning, Vincent's housekeeper found him dead and obviously the victim of foul play. Dornbach was arrested and charged with Vincent's murder. The prosecution seeks to have Walter testify at Dornbach's trial as to Walter's telephone conversation with Vincent. The prosecution's attempt is met by an objection from the defense. How should the court rule on Walter's testimony?
Options:
A. Admissible, as a present sense impression.
B. Admissible, as evidence of the victim's state of mind.
C. Admissible, as a prior identification.
D. Inadmissible, as hearsay not within any recognized exception to the hearsay rule. | A |
In the recently enacted Fair Opportunity Act, the United States Congress provided, among other things, that an employer whose products are in any way used by or sold to the federal government must meet certain very specific standards for integration of its workforce and affirmative action programs. Both civil and criminal penalties are established for violation of the Act, and it permits private civil suits for injunctive relief or for damages to enforce its provisions. The city of Davis, California also enacted a jobs opportunity ordinance effective the same year, requiring that any employer doing business with the city have a workforce consonant with the ethnic and gender composition of the population of the city. The local ordinance permits employers to apply for exemptions from its requirements if they can demonstrate that the pool of potential qualified employees has a different mix of ethnicity or gender than the general population. The population of Davis is approximately $55 \%$ female and $45 \%$ male, $75 \%$ white, $10 \%$ Asian, 7\% black, 7\% Hispanic, and $1 \%$ other ethnic backgrounds. Watson Janitorial Service, a private employer located in the city of Davis, does contract cleaning and maintenance for both the local United States Department of Agriculture office and for the City Jail. Its workforce is $95 \%$ male, $55 \%$ black, $40 \%$ Hispanic, and $5 \%$ other ethnic backgrounds. The city of Davis notified the company that it would either have to bring its workforce into compliance with the local job opportunity ordinance or its contract with the City Jail would be terminated. The United States Department of Justice has notified Watson Janitorial that it meets the guidelines of the Fair Opportunity Act, and that the contract with the Department of Agriculture is not in jeopardy. 6. Watson Janitorial brings an action in state court to enjoin enforcement of the Davis ordinance. It argues that the local rule is invalid since it conflicts with the federal statute by creating more stringent standards. The trial court should rule: (A) There is no conflict, since Congress intended only that the Fair Opportunity Act apply to employers who dealt exclusively with the federal government. (B) There is no conflict, since Davis is permitted to impose more strict requirements to a local problem than those established by the federal government. (C) The federal act preempts the local ordinance and thus the latter cannot be enforced. (D) The federal act preempts the local ordinance only insofar as it attempts to regulate employers who do business with the federal government, so the ordinance may not be enforced only as to Watson Janitorial, but is otherwise valid. Jordan is an accomplice to:
Options:
A. Murder.
B. Manslaughter.
C. Criminally negligent homicide.
D. No degree of criminal homicide. | D |
On May 1, Ohner telegraphed Byer, "Will sell you any or all of the lots in Grove subdivision at $ 5,000$ each. Details follow in letter." The letter contained all the necessary details concerning terms of payment, insurance, mortgages, etc., and provided, "This offer remains open until June 1.' On May 2, after he had received the telegram but before he had received the letter, Byer telegraphed Ohner, "Accept your offer with respect to lot 101." Both parties knew that there were 50 lots in the Grove subdivision and that they were numbered 101 through 150 . For this question only, assume that on May 6, Byer telegraphed Ohner, "Will take the rest of the lots," and that on May 8, Ohner discovered that he did not have good title to the remaining lots. Which of the following would provide the best legal support to Ohner's contention that he was not liable for breach of contract as to the remaining 49 lots?
Options:
A. Impossibility of performance.
B. Unilateral mistake as to basic assumption.
C. Termination of the offer by Byer's having first contracted to buy lot 101 .
D. Excuse by failure of an implied condition precedent. | C |
A state accredits both public and private schools, licenses their teachers, and supplies textbooks on secular subjects to all such schools. Country Schoolhouse, a private school that offers elementary and secondary education in the state, denies admission to all non-Caucasians. In a suit to enjoin as unconstitutional the continued racially exclusionary admissions policy of the Country Schoolhouse, which of the following is the strongest argument against the school?
Options:
A. Because education is a public function, the Country Schoolhouse may not discriminate on racial grounds.
B. The state is so involved in school regulation and support that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is applicable to the school.
C. The state is constitutionally obligated to eliminate segregation in all public and private educational institutions within the state.
D. Any school with teachers who are licensed by the state is forbidden to discriminate on racial grounds. | B |
Congress passes a law regulating the wholesale and retail prices of "every purchase or sale of oil, natural gas, and electric power made in the United States." The strongest argument in support of the constitutionality of this statute is that:
Options:
A. The Constitution expressly empowers Congress to enact laws for "the general welfare."
B. Congress has the authority to regulate such products' interstate transportation and importation from abroad.
C. Congress may regulate the prices of every purchase and sale of goods and services made in this country, because commerce includes buying and selling.
D. In inseverable aggregates, the domestic purchases or sales of such products affect interstate or foreign commerce. | D |
While crossing Spruce Street, Pesko was hit by a car that she did not see. Pesko sued Dorry for her injuries. At trial, Pesko calls Williams, a police officer, to testify that, 10 minutes after the accident, a driver stopped him and said, "Officer, a few minutes ago I saw a hit-and-run accident on Spruce Street involving a blue convertible, which I followed to the drive-in restaurant at Oak and Third," and that a few seconds later Williams saw Dorry sitting alone in a blue convertible in the drive-in restaurant's parking lot. Williams's testimony about the driver's statement should be:
Options:
A. Admitted as a statement of recent perception.
B. Admitted as a present sense impression.
C. Excluded, because it is hearsay not within any exception.
D. Excluded, because it is more prejudicial than probative. | C |
Miller applied to the state liquor board for transfer of the license of Miller's Bar and Grill to a new site. The board held a hearing on the application. At that hearing, Hammond appeared without being subpoenaed and stated that Miller had underworld connections. Although Hammond did not know this information to be true, he had heard rumors about Miller's character and had noticed several underworld figures going in and out of Miller's Bar and Grill. In fact, Miller had no underworld connections. In a claim against Hammond based on defamation, Miller will:
Options:
A. Not recover if Hammond reasonably believed his statement to be true.
B. Not recover if the board granted Miller's application.
C. Recover, because Hammond's statement was false.
D. Recover, because Hammond appeared before the board voluntarily. | A |
In litigation over the estate of Baggs, who died intestate, Payton, who is 18 years old, claimed to be Baggs's niece and entitled, therefore, to a share of his large estate. In support of her claim, Payton offered in evidence a Bible, properly identified as having belonged to Baggs's family, in the front of which was a list of family births, marriages, and deaths. The list recorded Payton's birth to Baggs's oldest sister. To prove that Payton is Baggs's niece, the Bible listing is:
Options:
A. Admissible as an ancient document.
B. Admissible as a family record.
C. Inadmissible, because it is hearsay not within any exception.
D. Inadmissible, because there was no showing of firsthand knowledge by the one who wrote it. | B |
Professor Peterson, an expert on American Colonial and Revolutionary History, conducted full-day tours through the historic sites of Philadelphia every Wednesday and Thursday through the summer months. Peterson's fee for his services was $ 105$, which did not include the entrance fees for several of the historical sites. Other persons and organizations conducted various American history tours through the city for somewhat less than Peterson, but Peterson's tour was generally rated the best by the leading tourist guidebooks because Peterson personally conducted the tours and shared his encyclopedic knowledge of American history and the city of Philadelphia. David had recently moved to Philadelphia, and all of his co-workers praised Professor Peterson's tour, but David was not inclined to pay $ 105$ for a tour of the historical sites of his new city. Therefore, David took a day off one Thursday and "hung around" the Liberty Bell monument, where Peterson's tour started. That day Peterson was conducting 27 persons on the tour. Most of the participants had paid in advance, but Peterson was holding up a sign with information about the tour and handing out brochures, one of which David took. Peterson accepted a few additional participants who signed up on the spot, but David was not among them. All day long, David hung around at the fringe of this group, paying the entrance fees separately but following the group through the different historical sites. However, he always positioned himself close enough to Peterson's group so that he could hear virtually every word of Peterson's lecture, although David did not ask Peterson any questions. David signed his name and address on the register at Independence Hall. Peterson noted this and took down the information. Two days after the tour concluded, David received a bill from Peterson in the amount of $ 105$. David will most likely be required to pay Peterson:
Options:
A. $ 105$, because that is the contract price for the tour.
B. $ 105$, because the amount of the contract was less than $ 500$, making the Statute of Frauds inapplicable.
C. $ 105$, if that is a reasonable fee for the lectures based on Peterson's expertise.
D. Nothing, because the historical sites were open to the public and David paid his own way. | A |
While on walking patrol in a commercial district in the early evening, Officer Murdoch noticed that a light was on in Walker's Machine Shop. Curious about what was going on inside, the officer tried to look through the window of the shop, but it had been painted on the inside so that only a strip about three inches at the top, eight feet above street level, was still transparent. Officer Murdoch quietly brought two trash cans from a neighboring business over to the window, stood on them and saw, through the strip of unpainted window, that the shop owner's son Tommy was inside with a friend, sucking white powder into his nose through a rolled up tube of paper from off a small mirror. Recognizing from his experience and training that Tommy was snorting cocaine, Officer Murdoch knocked at the front door to the shop, and Tommy let him in. Murdoch immediately arrested Tommy and his friend. In the back room of the shop through whose window he had peered, Murdoch found and seized several grams of cocaine, a razor blade, and a mirror. In Tommy's subsequent prosecution for possession of cocaine, Tommy seeks to bar introduction of the cocaine, mirror, and razor blade into evidence. His motion will probably be:
Options:
A. Granted, because Officer Murdoch could not have known that Tommy was snorting cocaine absent a chemical test of the substance being snorted.
B. Granted, because Officer Murdoch violated Tommy's reasonable expectation of privacy.
C. Denied, because the search was incident to a valid arrest.
D. Denied, because Tommy consented to Officer Murdoch's entry into the shop. | B |
Downs was indicted in state court for bribing a public official. During the course of the investigation, police had demanded and received from Downs's bank the records of Downs's checking account for the preceding two years. The records contained incriminating evidence. On the basis of a claim of violation of his constitutional rights, Downs moves to prevent the introduction of the records in evidence. His motion should be:
Options:
A. Granted, because a search warrant should have been secured for seizure of the records.
B. Granted, because the records covered such an extensive period of time that their seizure unreasonably invaded Downs's right of privacy.
C. Denied, because the potential destructibility of the records, coupled with the public interest in proper enforcement of the criminal laws, created an exigent situation justifying the seizure.
D. Denied, because the records were business records of the bank in which Downs had no legitimate expectation of privacy. | D |
Nolan was negligently driving down the road, not paying attention to where he was going. Because of this, he hit and seriously injured Sue, who was lawfully crossing the street. The accident was witnessed by Martha, who suffered extreme emotional distress that physically affected her nervous system. Martha brings suit against Nolan for negligent infliction of emotional distress in a jurisdiction that has not adopted the "foreseeability" test for this tort. The most likely result of the suit will be that:
Options:
A. Martha will win, because she witnessed Sue being seriously injured by Nolan.
B. Martha will win, because severe shock to the nervous system constitutes a physical injury.
C. Martha will lose, unless she was crossing the street with Sue.
D. Martha will lose, unless she was a close relative of Sue. | C |
At a time when Ogawa held Lot 1 in the Fairoaks subdivision in fee simple, Vine executed a warranty deed that recited that Vine conveyed Lot 1, Fairoaks, to Purvis. The deed was promptly and duly recorded. After the recording of the deed from Vine to Purvis, Ogawa conveyed Lot 1 to Vine by a warranty deed that was promptly and duly recorded. Later, Vine conveyed the property to Rand by warranty deed and the deed was promptly and duly recorded. Rand paid the fair market value of Lot 1 and had no knowledge of any claim of Purvis. In an appropriate action, Rand and Purvis contest title to Lot 1 . In this action, judgment should be for:
Options:
A. Purvis, because Purvis's deed is senior to Rand's.
B. Rand, because Rand paid value without notice of Purvis's claim.
C. Purvis or Rand, depending on whether a subsequent grantee is bound, at common law, by the doctrine of estoppel by deed.
D. Purvis or Rand, depending on whether Purvis's deed is deemed recorded in Rand's chain of title. | D |
In 1980 Omar, the owner in fee simple absolute, conveyed Stoneacre, a five-acre tract of land. The relevant, operative words of the deed conveyed to "Church [a duly organized religious body having power to hold property] for the life of my son, Carl, and from and after the death of my said son, Carl, to all of my grandchildren and their heirs and assigns in equal shares; provided that Church shall use the premises for church purposes only." In an existing building on Stoneacre, Church immediately began to conduct religious services and other activities normally associated with a church. In 1995, Church granted to Darin a right to remove sand and gravel from a one-half acre portion of Stoneacre upon the payment of royalty. Darin has regularly removed sand and gravel since 1995 and paid a royalty to Church. Church has continued to conduct religious services and other church activities on Stoneacre. All four of the living grandchildren of Omar, joined by a guardian ad litem to represent unborn grandchildren, instituted suit against Church and Darin seeking damages for the removal of sand and gravel and an injunction preventing further acts of removal. There is no applicable statute. Which of the following best describes the likely disposition of this lawsuit?
Options:
A. The plaintiffs should succeed, because the interest of Church terminated with the first removal of sand and gravel.
B. Church and Darin should be enjoined, and damages should be recovered but impounded for future distribution.
C. The injunction should be granted, but damages should be denied, because Omar and Carl are not parties to the action.
D. Damages should be awarded, but the injunction should be denied. | B |
According to a statute of the state of Kiowa, a candidate for state office may have his name placed on the official election ballot only if he files with the appropriate state official a petition containing a specified number of voter signatures. Roderick failed to get his name placed on the state ballot as an independent candidate for governor because he failed to file a petition with the number of voter signatures required by state statute. In a suit against the appropriate state officials in federal district court, Roderick sought an injunction against the petition signature requirement on the ground that it was unconstitutional. Which of the following, if established, constitutes the strongest argument for Roderick?
Options:
A. Compliance with the petition signature requirement is burdensome.
B. The objectives of the statute could be satisfactorily achieved by less burdensome means.
C. Because of the petition signature requirement, very few independent candidates have ever succeeded in getting on the ballot.
D. The motivation for the statute was a desire to keep candidates off the ballot if they did not have strong support among voters. | B |
Congress passes an act requiring that all owners of bicycles in the United States register them with a federal bicycle registry. The purpose of the law is to provide reliable evidence of ownership to reduce bicycle theft. No fee is charged for the registration. Although most stolen bicycles are kept or resold by the thieves in the same cities in which the bicycles were stolen, an increasing number of bicycles are being taken to cities in other states for resale. Is this act of Congress constitutional?
Options:
A. Yes, because Congress has the power to regulate property for the general welfare.
B. Yes, because Congress could determine that, in inseverable aggregates, bicycle thefts affect interstate commerce.
C. No, because most stolen bicycles remain within the state in which they were stolen.
D. No, because the registration of vehicles is a matter reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment. | B |
Talbot and Rogers, as lessees, signed a valid lease for a house. Lane, the landlord, duly executed the lease and delivered possession of the premises to the lessees. During the term of the lease, Rogers verbally invited Andrews to share the house with the lessees. Andrews agreed to pay part of the rent to Lane, who did not object to this arrangement, despite a provision in the lease that provided that "any assignment, subletting or transfer of any rights under this lease without the express written consent of the landlord is strictly prohibited, null and void." Talbot objected to Andrews's moving in, even if Andrews were to pay a part of the rent. When Andrews moved in, Talbot brought an appropriate action against Lane, Rogers, and Andrews for a declaratory judgment that Rogers had no right to assign. Rogers's defense was that he and Talbot were tenants in common of a term for years, and that he, Rogers, had a right to assign a fractional interest in his undivided onehalf interest. In this action, Talbot will:
Options:
A. Prevail, because a co-tenant has no right to assign all or any part of a leasehold without the consent of all interested parties.
B. Prevail, because the lease provision prohibits assignment.
C. Not prevail, because he is not the beneficiary of the nonassignment provision in the lease.
D. Not prevail, because his claim amounts to a void restraint on alienation. | C |
John Smith has denied his purported signature on a letter that has become critical in a breach of contract suit between Smith and Miller. At trial, Miller's counsel calls Alice, a teacher, who testifies that she taught John Smith mathematics in school 10 years earlier, knows his signature, and proposes to testify that the signature to the letter is that of John Smith. Smith's counsel objects. The trial judge should:
Options:
A. Sustain the objection on the ground that identification of handwriting requires expert testimony and the teacher does not, per se, qualify as an expert.
B. Sustain the objection on the ground that the best evidence of Smith's handwriting would be testimony by a person who had examined his writing more recently than 10 years ago.
C. Overrule the objection on the ground that a schoolteacher qualifies as an expert witness for the purpose of identifying handwriting.
D. Overrule the objection on the ground that a layman may identify handwriting if he has seen the person in question write, and has an opinion concerning the writing in question. | D |
A statute in a jurisdiction makes it a crime to sell ammunition to a minor (defined as a person under the age of 18). The courts have interpreted this statute as creating a strict liability offense that does not require knowledge of the age of the purchaser and as creating vicarious liability. Duncan, who was 16 years old, but looked four or five years older, entered a store owned by Mathews and asked a clerk for a box of .22 caliber shells. Mathews had instructed her employees not to sell ammunition to minors. The clerk asked Duncan his age. Duncan said he was 20 . The clerk then placed a box of shells on the counter and asked, "Anything else?" Duncan said that was all he wanted but then discovered he did not have enough money to pay for the shells, so the clerk put the box back onto the shelf. If Mathews, the owner of the store, is charged with attempting to violate the statute, her best argument would be that:
Options:
A. It was impossible for the sale to have occurred.
B. She had strictly instructed her employees not to sell ammunition to minors.
C. Duncan lied about his age.
D. The clerk did not have the mental state needed for attempt. | D |
In 1975, Hubert Green executed his will which in pertinent part provided, "I hereby give, devise, and bequeath Greenvale to my surviving widow for life, remainder to such of my children as shall live to attain the age of 30 years, but if any child dies under the age of 30 years survived by a child or children, such child or children shall take and receive the share which his, her, or their parent would have received had such parent lived to attain the age of 30 years." At the date of writing his will, Green was married to Susan, and they had two children, Allan and Beth. Susan died in 1980 and Hubert married Waverly in 1982. At his death in 1990 , Green was survived by his wife, Waverly, and three children, Allan, Beth, and Carter. Carter, who was born in 1984, was his child by Waverly. In a jurisdiction that recognizes the common law Rule Against Perpetuities unmodified by statute, the result of the application of the Rule is that the:
Options:
A. Remainder to the children and to the grandchildren is void because Green could have subsequently married a person who was unborn at the time Green executed his will.
B. Remainder to the children is valid, but the substitutionary gift to the grandchildren is void because Green could have subsequently married a person who was unborn at the time Green executed his will.
C. Gift in remainder to Allan and Beth or their children is valid, but the gift to Carter or his children is void.
D. Remainder to the children and the substitutionary gift to the grandchildren are valid. | D |
Defendant was charged with murder. His principal defense was that he had killed in hot blood and should be guilty only of manslaughter. The judge instructed the jury that the state must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that the killing was presumed to be murder, and that the charge could be reduced to manslaughter, and Defendant accordingly found guilty of this lesser offense, if Defendant showed by a fair preponderance of the evidence that the killing was committed in the heat of passion on sudden provocation. Defendant was convicted of murder. On appeal, he seeks a new trial and claims error in the judge's instructions to the jury. Defendant's conviction will most probably be:
Options:
A. Affirmed, because the judge carefully advised the jury of the state's obligation to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
B. Affirmed, because Defendant's burden to show hot blood was not one of ultimate persuasion but only one of producing evidence to rebut a legitimate presumption.
C. Reversed, because the instruction put a burden on Defendant that denied him due process of law.
D. Reversed, because presumptions have a highly prejudicial effect and thus cannot be used on behalf of the state in a criminal case. | C |
Brown contended that Green owed him $ 6,000$. Green denied that he owed Brown anything. Tired of the dispute, Green eventually signed a promissory note by which he promised to pay Brown $ 5,000$ in settlement of their dispute. In an action by Brown against Green on the promissory note, which of the following, if true, would afford Green the best defense?
Options:
A. Although Brown honestly believed that $ 6,000$ was owed by Green, Green knew that it was not owed.
B. Although Brown knew that the debt was not owed, Green honestly was in doubt whether it was owed.
C. The original claim was based on an oral agreement, which the Statute of Frauds required to be in writing.
D. The original claim was an action on a contract, which was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. | B |
Rimm and Hill were fooling around with a pistol in Hill's den. Rimm aimed the pistol in Hill's direction and fired three shots slightly to Hill's right. One shot ricocheted off the wall and struck Hill in the back, killing him instantly. The most serious crime of which Rimm can be convicted is:
Options:
A. Murder.
B. Voluntary manslaughter.
C. Involuntary manslaughter.
D. Assault with a dangerous weapon. | A |
Alpha and Beta made a written contract pursuant to which Alpha promised to convey a specified apartment house to Beta in return for Beta's promise (1) to convey a 100 -acre farm to Alpha and (2) to pay Alpha $ 1,000$ in cash six months after the exchange of the apartment house and the farm. The contract contained the following provision: "It is understood and agreed that Beta's obligation to pay the $ 1,000$ six months after the exchange of the apartment house and the farm shall be voided if Alpha has not, within three months after the aforesaid exchange, removed the existing shed in the parking area in the rear of the said apartment house." Federal taxpayer Allen challenges the provision that allows the distribution of free textbooks to students in a private school where religious instruction is included in the curriculum. On the question of the adequacy of Allen's standing to raise the constitutional question, the most likely result is that standing will be:
Options:
A. Sustained, because any congressional spending authorization can be challenged by any taxpayer.
B. Sustained, because the challenge to the exercise of congressional spending power is based on a claimed violation of specific constitutional limitations on the exercise of such power.
C. Denied, because there is insufficient nexus between the taxpayer and the challenged expenditures. | B |
A written contract was entered into between Bouquet, a financier-investor, and Vintage Corporation, a winery and grape-grower. The contract provided that Bouquet would invest $ 1$ million in Vintage for its capital expansion and, in return, that Vintage, from grapes grown in its famous vineyards, would produce and market at least 500,000 bottles of wine each year for five years under the label "Premium Vintage-Bouquet." The contract included provisions that the parties would share equally the profits and losses from the venture and that, if feasible, the wine would be distributed by Vintage only through Claret, a wholesale distributor of fine wines. Neither Bouquet nor Vintage had previously dealt with Claret. Claret learned of the contract two days later from reading a trade newspaper. In reliance thereon, he immediately hired an additional sales executive and contracted for enlargement of his wine storage and display facility. 81. If Vintage refuses to distribute the wine through Claret and Claret then sues Vintage for breach of contract, is it likely that Claret will prevail? (A) Yes, because Vintage's performance was to run to Claret rather than to Bouquet. (B) Yes, because Bouquet and Vintage could reasonably foresee that Claret would change his position in reliance on the contract. (C) No, because Bouquet and Vintage did not expressly agree that Claret would have enforceable rights under their contract. (D) No, because Bouquet and Vintage, having no apparent motive to benefit Claret, appeared in making the contract to have been protecting or serving only their own interests. For this question only, assume the following facts. Amicusbank lent Bouquet $ 200,000$ and Bouquet executed a written instrument providing that Amicusbank "is entitled to collect the debt from my share of the profits, if any, under the Vintage-Bouquet contract." Amicusbank gave prompt notice of this transaction to Vintage. If Vintage thereafter refuses to account for any profits to Amicusbank and Amicusbank sues Vintage for Bouquet's share of profits then realized, Vintage's strongest argument in defense is that:
Options:
A. The Bouquet-Vintage contract did not expressly authorize an assignment of rights.
B. Bouquet and Vintage are partners, not simply debtor and creditor.
C. Amicusbank is not an assignee of Bouquet's rights under the BouquetVintage contract.
D. Amicusbank is not an intended thirdparty beneficiary of the BouquetVintage contract. | C |
Dino purchased a new Belchfire automobile from Dealer. Within a few days of the purchase, Dino returned the car to Dealer for repairs. Dino complained, "There's something wrong with the brakes. The car keeps pulling to the left whenever I apply them."' Dealer's mechanic readjusted the brakes but did not detect any other problem with the brake system. Dealer's mechanic told Dino, "You shouldn't have any more problems with those brakes. However, if the same problem does occur, don't panic. The car may pull to the left, but the brakes will still work, allowing you to stop the car." Dino drove the car home. It worked fine for two days, but then the brakes started pulling to the left again. As Dino was driving the car back to Dealer's shop for further repair, he saw Pedestrian crossing the street. Dino pressed his foot down on the brake pedal, but the master cylinder failed, and the car would not stop. Dino's car struck Pedestrian, injuring him. 91. If Pedestrian sues Dino for his injuries: (A) Pedestrian will prevail, because Dino knew that there was a problem with his brakes. (B) Pedestrian will prevail, because drivers have a duty to maintain their vehicles in safe working order. (C) Dino will prevail, because he had no reason to know that his brakes would not stop the car. (D) Dino will prevail, because he diligently had his brakes repaired. For this question only, assume the following facts. Because she was overextended on other construction jobs, Structo did not complete the house until October 15. Homey returned on November 1 as planned and occupied the house. Ten days later, after making the $ 40,000$ final payment to Structo, Homey learned for the first time that the house had not been completed until October 15. If Homey sues Structo for breach of contract on account of the 15-day delay in completion, which of the following will the court probably decide?
Options:
A. Homey will recover damages as specified in the contract, i.e., $ 500$ multiplied by 15 .
B. Homey will recover his actual damages, if any, caused by the delay in completion.
C. Having waived the delay by occupying the house and making the final payment, Homey will recover nothing.
D. Homey will recover nothing because the contractual completion date was impliedly modified to November 1 when Homey on January 2 advised Structo about Homey's prospective trip and return date. | B |
On January 1, Awl and Howser agreed in writing that Awl would build a house on Howser's lot according to Howser's plans and specifications for $ 60,000$, the work to commence on April 1. Howser agreed to make an initial payment of $ 10,000$ on April 1, and to pay the balance upon completion of the work. On February 1, Awl notified Howser that he (Awl) would lose money on the job at that price, and would not proceed with the work unless Howser would agree to increase the price to $ 90,000$. Howser thereupon, without notifying Awl, agreed in writing with Gutter for Gutter, commencing April 1, to build the house for $ 75,000$, which was the fair market cost of the work to be done. On April 1, both Awl and Gutter showed up at the building site to begin work, Awl telling Howser that he had decided to "take the loss" and would build the house for $ 60,000$ as originally agreed. Howser dismissed Awl and allowed Gutter to begin work on the house. Ruth also sues the officer, alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress. Will she recover?
Options:
A. No, unless the officer knew that Ruth and Bert were husband and wife.
B. No, if the officer did not know that Ruth was watching from across the street.
C. Yes, because the officer's conduct regarding Bert was extreme and outrageous.
D. Yes, because the officer's conduct caused Ruth to be severely emotionally disturbed. | B |
On June 1, Kravat, a manufacturer of men's neckties, received the following order from Clothier: "Ship 500 two-inch ties, assorted stripes, your catalogue No. V34. Delivery by July $1 . "$ On June 1, Kravat shipped 500 three-inch ties that arrived at Clothier's place of business on June 3. Clothier immediately telegraphed Kravat: "Reject your shipment. Order was for two-inch ties." Clothier, however, did not ship the ties back to Kravat. Kravat replied by telegram: "Will deliver proper ties before July 1." Clothier received this telegram on June 4, but did not reply to it. On June 30, Kravat tendered 500 two-inch ties in assorted stripes, designated in his catalogue as item No. V34; but Clothier refused to accept them. After Orris's conveyance to Powell, title to Brownacre was in:
Options:
A. Hull.
B. Orris.
C. Burns. | A |
Congressional legislation regulating the conditions for marriages and divorces would be most likely upheld if it:
Options:
A. Applied only to marriages and divorces by members of the armed services.
B. Applied only to marriages performed by federal judges and to divorces granted by federal courts.
C. Implemented an executive agreement seeking to define basic human rights.
D. Applied only to marriages and divorces in the District of Columbia. | D |
A state statute requires that all buses which operate as common carriers on the highways of the state shall be equipped with seat belts for passengers. Transport Lines, an interstate carrier, challenges the validity of the statute and the right of the state to make the requirement. What is the best basis for a constitutional challenge by Transport Lines?
Options:
A. Violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
B. Violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
C. Unreasonable burden on interstate commerce.
D. Difficulty of enforcement. | C |
Supermedia, a television station, was conducting a "person on the street" interview segment live for its evening "magazine" show and asking citizens of the community what they thought were the biggest problems facing the city. When the interviewer stopped Don and asked him the question, he replied, "Corruption in city government, particularly the mayor." William, mayor of the city, has now brought an action for defamation against Don. At trial, William has produced testimony as to his honesty and good character. Which of the following evidence could Don properly adduce at trial as part of his defense? I. The fact that William was convicted two years ago of taking a bribe to award a city contract for solid waste disposal. II. The testimony of Harold, a local newspaper editor, that William is known throughout the state as a corrupt politician. III. The testimony of Allen, a former campaign manager of William's, that William was corrupt.
Options:
A. I. only.
B. I. and II. only.
C. I. and III. only.
D. I., II., and III. | D |
Chemco designed and built a large tank on its premises for the purpose of storing highly toxic gas. The tank developed a sudden leak and escaping toxic gas drifted into the adjacent premises, where Nyman lived. Nyman inhaled the gas and died as a result. In a suit brought by Nyman's personal representative against Chemco, which of the following must be established if the claim is to prevail? I. The toxic gas that escaped from Chemco's premises was the cause of Nyman's death. II. The tank was built in a defective manner. III. Chemco was negligent in designing the tank.
Options:
A. I. only.
B. I. and II. only.
C. I. and III. only.
D. I., II., and III. | A |
An issue in Parker's action against Daves for causing Parker's back injury was whether Parker's condition had resulted principally from a similar occurrence five years before, with which Daves had no connection. Parker called Watts, his treating physician, who offered to testify that when she saw Parker after the latest occurrence, Parker told her that before the accident he had been working fulltime, without pain or limitation of motion, in a job that involved lifting heavy boxes. Watts's testimony should be:
Options:
A. Admitted, because it is a statement of Parker's then-existing physical condition.
B. Admitted, because it is a statement made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment.
C. Excluded, because it is hearsay not within any exception.
D. Excluded, because Parker is available as a witness. | B |
Phyllis was crossing the street at a crosswalk, but did not look both ways. As she walked, Phyllis was hit by a car driven by Brett, and immediately afterwards, she was struck by a car driven by Andrew. As a result of these collisions with the cars, Phyllis suffered severe injuries. Although it was impossible to determine which portion of Phyllis's injuries was caused by Andrew and which by Brett, at the trial of Phyllis's suit, the jury determined that Andrew was $20 \%$ negligent, that Brett was $40 \%$ negligent, and that Phyllis was $40 \%$ negligent. It was further determined that Phyllis had suffered $ 100,000$ in damages. Phyllis had already received $ 10,000$ from her group medical insurance plan. Andrew had a $ 500,000$ auto liability insurance policy, and Brett is now insolvent. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, how much will Phyllis recover in damages from Andrew?
Options:
A. $ 90,000$.
B. $ 60,000$.
C. $ 50,000$.
D. $ 20,000$. | B |
Dent and Wren were playing golf. After they had completed nine holes, Dent left to make a telephone call. When he returned, he told Wren, "My wife was just involved in an accident. She ran a red light and hit another car. I have to skip the back nine." After arriving at the scene of the accident, Dent, after talking with bystanders, determined that his wife had not driven through a red light. Notch, the driver of the other car, brought suit against Dent's wife for injuries suffered in the accident. To help establish liability, Notch seeks to have Wren testify as to Dent's statements on the golf course. Wren's testimony is:
Options:
A. Admissible as an admission.
B. Admissible as a statement against interest.
C. Inadmissible, because it is hearsay not within any recognized exception.
D. Inadmissible, because it constitutes opinion. | C |
Astin left her car at Garrison's Garage to have repair work done. After completing the repairs, Garrison took the car out for a test drive and was involved in an accident that caused damages to Placek. A statute imposes liability on the owner of an automobile for injuries to a third party that are caused by the negligence of any person driving the automobile with the owner's consent. The statute applies to situations of this kind, even if the owner did not specifically authorize the mechanic to test-drive the car. Placek sued Astin and Garrison jointly for damages arising from the accident. In that action, Astin cross-claims to recover from Garrison the amount of any payment Astin may be required to make to Placek. The trier of fact has determined that the accident was caused solely by negligent driving on Garrison's part, and that Placek's damages were $ 100,000$. In this action, the proper outcome will be that:
Options:
A. Placek should have judgment for $ 50,000$ each against Astin and Garrison; Astin should recover nothing from Garrison.
B. Placek should have judgment for $ 100,000$ against Garrison only.
C. Placek should have judgment for $ 100,000$ against Astin and Garrison jointly, and Astin should have judgment against Garrison for $50 \%$ of any amount collected from Astin by Placek.
D. Placek should have judgment for $ 100,000$ against Astin and Garrison jointly, and Astin should have judgment against Garrison for any amount collected from Astin by Placek. | D |
A 10-lot subdivision was approved by the proper governmental authority. The authority's action was pursuant to a map filed by Diaz, which included an undesignated parcel in addition to the 10 numbered lots. The shape of the undesignated parcel is different and somewhat larger than any one of the numbered lots. Subdivision building restrictions were imposed on "all the lots shown on said map." Diaz contracts to sell the unnumbered lot, described by metes and bounds, to Butts. Is title to the parcel marketable?
Options:
A. Yes, because the undesignated parcel is not a lot to which the subdivision building restrictions apply.
B. Yes, because the undesignated parcel is not part of the subdivision.
C. No, because the undesignated parcel has never been approved by the proper governmental authority.
D. No, because the map leaves it uncertain whether the unnumbered lot is subject to the building restrictions. | D |
On January 2, Hugh Homey and Sue Structo entered into a written contract in which Structo agreed to build on Homey's lot a new house for Homey, according to plans and specifications furnished by Homey's architect, Barbara Bilevel, at a contract price of $ 200,000$. The contract provided for specified progress payments and a final payment of $ 40,000$ upon Homey's acceptance of the house and issuance of a certificate of final approval by the architect. Further, under a "liquidated damages" clause in the agreement, Structo promised to pay Homey $ 500$ for each day's delay in completing the house after the following October l. Homey, however, told Structo on January 2 , before the contract was signed, that he would be on an around-the-world vacation trip most of the summer and fall and would not return to occupy the house until November 1. For this question only, assume the following facts. Because she was overextended on other construction jobs, Structo did not complete the house until October 15. Homey returned on November 1 as planned and occupied the house. Ten days later, after making the $ 40,000$ final payment to Structo, Homey learned for the first time that the house had not been completed until October 15. If Homey sues Structo for breach of contract on account of the 15-day delay in completion, which of the following will the court probably decide?
Options:
A. Homey will recover damages as specified in the contract, i.e., $ 500$ multiplied by 15 .
B. Homey will recover his actual damages, if any, caused by the delay in completion.
C. Having waived the delay by occupying the house and making the final payment, Homey will recover nothing.
D. Homey will recover nothing because the contractual completion date was impliedly modified to November 1 when Homey on January 2 advised Structo about Homey's prospective trip and return date. | B |
A state statute requires the permanent removal from parental custody of any child who has suffered "child abuse." That term is defined to include "corporal punishment of any sort." Zeller very gently spanks his six-year-old son on the buttocks whenever he believes that spanking is necessary to enforce discipline on him. Such a spanking occurs no more than once a month and has never physically harmed the child. The state files suit under the statute to terminate Zeller's parental rights solely because of these spankings. Zeller defends only on the ground that the statute in question is unconstitutional as applied to his admitted conduct. In light of the nature of the rights involved, which of the following is the most probable burden of persuasion on this constitutional issue?
Options:
A. The state has the burden of persuading the court that the application of this statute to Zeller is necessary to vindicate a compelling state interest.
B. The state has the burden of persuading the court that the application of this statute to Zeller is rationally related to a legitimate state interest.
C. Zeller has the burden of persuading the court that the application of this statute to him is not necessary to vindicate an important state interest.
D. Zeller has the burden of persuading the court that the application of this statute to him is not rationally related to a legitimate state interest. | A |
Until 1954, the state of New Atlantic required segregation in all public and private schools, but all public schools are now desegregated. Other state laws, enacted before 1954 and continuing to the present, provide for free distribution of the same textbooks on secular subjects to students in all public and private schools. In addition, the state accredits schools and certifies teachers. Little White School House, a private school that offers elementary and secondary education in the state, denies admission to all non-Caucasians. Stone School is a private school that offers religious instruction. 46. Which of the following is the strongest argument against the constitutionality of free distribution of textbooks to the students at the Little White School House? (A) No legitimate educational function is served by the free distribution of textbooks. (B) The state may not in any way aid private schools. (C) The Constitution forbids private bias of any kind. (D) Segregation is furthered by the distribution of textbooks to these students. For this question only, assume that Prentis demonstrates that common carriers are permitted to transport snipe traps as cargo across Midland for delivery to another state and that, in practice, the Midland statute is enforced only against private individuals transporting those traps in private vehicles. If Prentis challenges the application of the Midland statute to her on the basis only of a denial of equal protection, this application of the statute will probably be found:
Options:
A. Constitutional, because the traps constitute contraband in which Prentis could have no protected property interest.
B. Constitutional, because there is a rational basis for differentiating between the possession of snipe traps as interstate cargo by common carriers and the possession of snipe traps by private individuals.
C. Unconstitutional, because the state cannot demonstrate a compelling public purpose for making this differentiation between common carriers and such private individuals.
D. Unconstitutional, because interstate travel is a fundamental right that may not be burdened by state law. | B |
In a trial between Jones and Smith, an issue arose about Smith's ownership of a horse, which had caused damage to Jones's crops. Jones offered to testify that he looked up Smith's telephone number in the directory, called that number, and that a voice answered, "This is Smith speaking." At this, Jones asked, "Was that your horse that tramped across my cornfield this afternoon?" The voice replied, "Yes." The judge should rule the testimony:
Options:
A. Admissible, because the answering speaker's identification of himself, together with the usual accuracy of the telephone directory and transmission system, furnishes sufficient authentication.
B. Admissible, because judicial notice may be taken of the accuracy of telephone directories.
C. Inadmissible unless Jones can further testify that he was familiar with Smith's voice and that it was in fact Smith to whom he spoke.
D. Inadmissible unless Smith has first been asked whether or not the conversation took place and has been given the opportunity to admit, deny, or explain. | A |
Don Dent was on trial for the murder of Michael Richards. At the trial, Dent put forth the defense of self-defense, claiming that Michael was about to kill him when he shot Michael. To help establish that he was in fear of Michael, Dent called Walter to testify. Walter will testify that he heard Sam Smith say to Dent, "Michael Richards is a mean, vicious killer; he has murdered three people in the past year." Walter's testimony is:
Options:
A. Admissible under the state of mind exception to the hearsay rule.
B. Admissible nonhearsay.
C. Inadmissible, because it is hearsay not covered by an exception.
D. Inadmissible, because it does not help establish that Dent acted in self-defense. | B |
The federal government has complete jurisdiction over certain park land located within the state of Plains. To conserve the wildlife that inhabits that land, the federal government enacts a statute forbidding all hunting of animals in the federal park. That statute also forbids the hunting of animals that have left the federal park and have entered the state of Plains. Hanson has a hunting license from the state of Plains authorizing him to hunt deer anywhere in the state. On land within the state of Plains located adjacent to the federal park, Hanson shoots a deer he knows has recently left the federal land. Hanson is prosecuted for violating the federal hunting law. The strongest ground supporting the constitutionality of the federal law forbidding the hunting of wild animals that wander off federal property is that:
Options:
A. This law is a necessary and proper means of protecting United States property.
B. The animals are moving in the stream of interstate commerce.
C. The police powers of the federal government encompass protection of wild animals.
D. Shooting wild animals is a privilege, not a right. | A |
Acorp and Beeco are companies that each manufacture pesticide $\mathrm{X}$. Their plants are located along the same river. During a specific $24-$ hour period, each plant discharged pesticide into the river. Both plants were operated negligently and such negligence caused the discharge of the pesticide into the river. Landesmann operated a cattle ranch downstream from the plants of Acorp and Beeco. Landesmann's cattle drank from the river and were poisoned by the pesticide. The amount of the discharge from either plant alone would not have been sufficient to cause any harm to Landesmann's cattle. If Landesmann asserts a claim against Acorp and Beeco, what, if anything, will Landesmann recover?
Options:
A. Nothing, because neither company discharged enough pesticide to cause harm to Landesmann's cattle.
B. Nothing, unless Landesmann can establish how much pesticide each plant discharged.
C. One-half of Landesmann's damages from each company.
D. The entire amount of Landesmann's damages, jointly and severally, from the two companies. | D |
On January 2, Hugh Homey and Sue Structo entered into a written contract in which Structo agreed to build on Homey's lot a new house for Homey, according to plans and specifications furnished by Homey's architect, Barbara Bilevel, at a contract price of $ 200,000$. The contract provided for specified progress payments and a final payment of $ 40,000$ upon Homey's acceptance of the house and issuance of a certificate of final approval by the architect. Further, under a "liquidated damages" clause in the agreement, Structo promised to pay Homey $ 500$ for each day's delay in completing the house after the following October l. Homey, however, told Structo on January 2 , before the contract was signed, that he would be on an around-the-world vacation trip most of the summer and fall and would not return to occupy the house until November 1. For this question only, assume the following facts: Structo completed the house on October 14 and, when Homey returned on November 1 , requested the final payment of $ 40,000$ and issuance of a certificate of final approval by the architect, Bilevel. Homey, however, refused to pay any part of the final installment after Bilevel told him, "Structo did a great job and I find no defects worth mentioning, but Structo's contract price was at least $ 40,000$ too high, especially in view of the big drop in housing values within the past 10 months. I will withhold the final certificate, and you just hold on to your money." If Structo sues Homey for the $ 40,000$ final payment after Bilevel's refusal to issue a final certificate, which of the following will the court probably decide?
Options:
A. Structo wins, because nonoccurrence of the condition requiring Bilevel's certificate of final approval was excused by Bilevel's bad-faith refusal to issue the certificate.
B. Structo wins, but, because all contractual conditions have not occurred, her recovery is limited to restitution of the benefit conferred on Homey, minus progress payments already received.
C. Homey wins, provided he can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the fair-market value of the completed house is $ 160,000$ or less.
D. Homey wins, provided he can prove by clear and convincing evidence that total payments to Structo of $ 160,000$ will yield a fair net profit. | A |
On January 15, Carpenter agreed to repair Householder's house according to certain specifications and to have the work completed by April 1. On March 1, Householder's property was inundated by flood waters which did not abate until March 15. Householder could not get the house in a condition which would permit Carpenter to begin the repairs until March 31 . On that date Carpenter notified Householder that he would not repair the house. Which one of the following facts, if it was the only one true and known to both parties on January 15, would best serve Carpenter as the basis for a defense in an action brought against him by Householder for breach of contract?
Options:
A. Carpenter's busy schedule permitted him to work on Householder's house only during the month of March.
B. Any delay in making the repairs would not seriously affect Householder's use of the property.
C. The cost of making repairs was increasing at the rate of $3 \%$ a month.
D. The area around Householder's property was frequently flooded during the month of March. | A |
Congress enacted a statute providing that persons may challenge a state energy law on the ground that it is in conflict with the federal Constitution in either federal or state court. According to this federal statute, any decision by a lower state court upholding a state energy law against a challenge based on the federal Constitution may be appealed directly to the United States Supreme Court. The provisions of this statute that authorize direct United States Supreme Court review of specified decisions rendered by lower state courts are:
Options:
A. Constitutional, because congressional control over questions of energy use is plenary.
B. Constitutional, because Congress may establish the manner by which the appellate jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court is exercised.
C. Unconstitutional, because they infringe the sovereign right of states to have their supreme courts review decisions of their lower state courts.
D. Unconstitutional, because under Article III of the Constitution, the United States Supreme Court does not have authority to review directly decisions of lower state courts. | B |