{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A judge issues a preliminary injunction against a company for environmental violations. The order does not describe the specific acts restrained but references the complaint filed by the plaintiffs. Is this order compliant with Rule 1?", "answer": "No. The order is not compliant with Rule 1 because it must describe in reasonable detail the act or acts restrained or required and may not reference the complaint or other documents."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can a temporary restraining order be issued without notifying the party to be enjoined?", "answer": "Yes. If the moving party submits an affidavit certifying the reasonable efforts made to give notice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must every order granting a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order include?", "answer": "Every order must (1) state the reasons why it was issued; (2) state its terms specifically; and (3) describe in reasonable detail the act or acts restrained or required."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A plaintiff was granted a temporary restraining order without notifying the defendant. The plaintiff then moves for an extension of the TRO because the key witness is on vacation and cannot testify on the hearing date. Will the court likely grant the extension?", "answer": "No. The court will not likely grant the extension because the unavailability of a witness due to a planned vacation is not considered good cause for extending a temporary restraining order."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is required for a judicial extension of a temporary restraining order?", "answer": "A party must move for the extension within the time limitation of the original order and show good cause for the extension."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What might constitute good cause for extending a temporary restraining order?", "answer": "Good cause might be a continuation of the circumstances of irreparable injury that justified the original order or new circumstances produced by the temporary restraining order."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A temporary restraining order was issued without notice to the adverse party and has been extended once for 14 days. Can it be extended for another 14 days without being treated as a preliminary injunction?", "answer": "No, if a temporary restraining order is extended for a period longer than 28 days, it is treated as a preliminary injunction and is appealable."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How long can a temporary restraining order issued without notice to the adverse party last?", "answer": "It lasts 14 days, with a possible single 14-day extension for a total of 28 days."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens if a temporary restraining order is extended for longer than 28 days?", "answer": "It is treated as a preliminary injunction and is appealable."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "In a federal diversity case, a party argues that the burden of persuasion should follow federal law because it involves pleading standards. Should the federal court follow federal or state law in this matter?", "answer": "The federal court should follow state substantive law and federal procedural law. Since the burden of persuasion involves basic policy considerations regarding the substance of the case, the federal court must apply the state law as would the highest court in the state."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What law does a federal court follow in a diversity case?", "answer": "The court will generally follow state substantive law and federal procedural law."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A plaintiff amends the complaint to add a new party due to initially suing the wrong party by mistake. The proper party learns of the suit within the 120-day period and realizes it was meant to be the defendant. Will the amendment relate back?", "answer": "Yes. The amendment will relate back because the proper party learned of the suit within the 120-day period for service of the complaint and realized that it was actually meant to be the defendant due to the plaintiff's mistake about the identity of the proper party."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When do amendments to change factual or legal allegations relate back?", "answer": "They relate back as long as the new allegations arise from the same litigation events as the original pleadings."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When will an amendment to add a new party relate back?", "answer": "It will relate back only if the plaintiff sued the wrong party due to a mistake about the identity of the proper party and the proper party learns of the suit within the 120-day period for service of the complaint and realizes that it was actually meant to be the defendant."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A complaint details an accident where the plaintiff was hit by the defendant, providing the date, place, and resulting injuries. The defendant files a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Will the complaint likely survive the motion?", "answer": "Yes. The complaint will likely survive the motion to dismiss because it contains sufficient factual content to state a plausible negligence claim, giving the defendant fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What constitutes a factually plausible claim?", "answer": "A claim is factually plausible when the plaintiff has pleaded sufficient factual content that allows the court to draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a complaint contain to survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim?", "answer": "It must contain sufficient facts to state a claim that is plausible on its face."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How can a party secure the right to a jury trial?", "answer": "A jury trial demand may be included in a pleading and including it in a properly filed and served complaint secures the right."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "An attorney files a complaint claiming breach of contract based solely on the client's verbal statement without further investigation. Is this compliant with Rule 11?", "answer": "No. This is not compliant with Rule 11 because the attorney must reasonably investigate whether there was a contract, whether it was breached, and whether it caused damage. Rule 11 requires a reasonable pre-filing inquiry."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does FRCP Rule 11 prohibit?", "answer": "It prohibits filing papers that make allegations and other factual contentions that lack evidentiary support unless the allegation is specifically identified as likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When may attorneys rely on affidavits and documents provided by their clients?", "answer": "Attorneys may rely on them unless the circumstances suggest that it would be unreasonable to do so or that further inquiry is needed."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under FRCP Rule 11, who may be sanctioned for making frivolous legal arguments?", "answer": "A represented party may be sanctioned for anything except a frivolous legal argument; monetary sanctions for frivolous legal claims are issued against the lawyer, not the represented party."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "An attorney files a motion for sanctions against the opposing party without serving the motion first. Is this compliant with Rule 10?", "answer": "No. This is not compliant with Rule 10. The motion for sanctions must first be served on the opposing party, who then gets a 21-day 'safe-harbor' period to withdraw or correct any bad pleading."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must happen before a motion for sanctions is filed with the court?", "answer": "The motion must first be served on the opposing party, and the offending party gets a 21-day 'safe-harbor' period to withdraw or correct any bad pleading."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can a crossclaim be solely an assertion of a defense?", "answer": "No. A crossclaim must be a claim for relief and cannot be solely an assertion of a defense."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Dave files a crossclaim against Doug which only asserts a defense. Is this crossclaim proper?", "answer": "No. The crossclaim is improper because it is not a claim for relief."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When is a crossclaim by one party against a co-party allowed?", "answer": "A crossclaim is allowed if the claim is closely (transactionally) related to at least one claim in the action and is sufficient for relief with its own damages."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "In a tort action against D, the defendant wants to bring a breach of contract claim that stems from the same transaction as the tort action. Is this breach of contract claim compulsory?", "answer": "Yes. The breach of contract claim is a compulsory counterclaim to the tort action because it arises out of the same transaction or occurrence."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens if a party fails to plead a compulsory counterclaim?", "answer": "If a party fails to plead a compulsory counterclaim while litigation is pending, it is forever barred from raising the claim."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When is a counterclaim compulsory?", "answer": "A counterclaim is compulsory if it arises out of the same transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the original claim."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Paul from Pennsylvania sues David from Delaware for $100,000 for negligence in Texas that also caused $76,000 damage to property belonging to Tom from Texas. Can Tom intervene if Paul sues David in federal district court in Texas?", "answer": "Yes, Tom can intervene because his claim arises from the same incident and does not destroy complete diversity."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is required for a permissive intervention to be granted?", "answer": "Permissive intervention must not destroy complete diversity and must be supported by its own jurisdictional ground."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When may intervention be granted to a non-party?", "answer": "Intervention may be granted to a non-party of right if the claim will impair a related interest that no other party adequately represents, or permissively if the applicant's claim or defense and the main action have common questions of fact or law."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When may a defendant serve a third-party claim on a nonparty?", "answer": "A defendant may serve a third-party claim only on a nonparty who is or may be liable to it for all or part of the claim against it, meaning that the basis of the claim must be derivative liability."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "In an action filed in federal district court, the plaintiff serves the defendant with the summons and complaint along with interrogatories. What can the defendant do?", "answer": "The defendant can obtain a protective order regarding the interrogatories because formal discovery may not commence until after the parties have met and conferred."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When may formal discovery commence?", "answer": "Formal discovery may not commence until the parties have met and conferred to discuss their claims and defenses, possible settlement, initial disclosures, and a discovery plan."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "The plaintiff files a complaint in federal court and the defendant answers and files a motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff decides to dismiss the action with the intent to refile it later. What must the plaintiff do?", "answer": "The plaintiff must file a motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When can a plaintiff voluntarily dismiss an action?", "answer": "A plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss an action by filing a notice of dismissal any time prior to service of an adverse party's answer or motion for summary judgment."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "The plaintiff sues his employer for age discrimination. The employer files a motion for summary judgment with proof that the plaintiff's poor job performance was the reason for termination. What can the court do if the plaintiff shows essential facts needed to justify his opposition are not available without discovery?", "answer": "The court may refuse the application for summary judgment and allow additional time for discovery."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a party opposing a motion for summary judgment show in its affidavit?", "answer": "The party must show that it cannot obtain affidavits containing facts essential to justify its opposition to summary judgment, which may lead the court to deny the summary judgment motion or order a continuance for further discovery."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "The defendant makes a motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff requires more time for additional discovery. What must the plaintiff do?", "answer": "The plaintiff must establish a basis for additional discovery and attach a declaration describing the desired discovery that has the potential to raise a genuine issue of material fact when taken in a light most favorable to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When is summary judgment properly entered?", "answer": "Summary judgment is properly entered after an adequate time for discovery and the opposing party may have a right to a continuance by submitting an application demonstrating the need for additional discovery."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must the non-moving party do to defeat a motion for summary judgment?", "answer": "The non-moving party must identify specific evidence in the record demonstrating a material factual dispute for trial, citing specific materials such as depositions, documents, affidavits, and admissions."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "The scheduling order deadline for discovery has passed and the trial is scheduled for one month from now. An attorney makes a motion for a 6-month extension to conduct discovery because he had been too busy to depose key witnesses. Will this motion be granted?", "answer": "No. The motion request will be denied because the attorney has not shown good cause for the delay."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a party show to amend pleadings after a scheduling order deadline?", "answer": "The party must show good cause, which requires a showing that the party acted diligently to try to meet the original deadline."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Discovery closes and the court enters a final pre-trial order setting out the issues for trial. A party seeks to amend the order to include another issue. When may this motion be granted?", "answer": "The motion may be granted only to prevent manifest injustice, which is a very difficult standard to meet."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does a pre-trial order detail and how can it be amended?", "answer": "A pre-trial order details the witnesses, issues, evidence, and the order of trial. It supersedes the pleadings and may be amended only to prevent manifest injustice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under FRCP Rule 16, what happens after a trial court issues a final pretrial order regarding the trial plan?", "answer": "The order supersedes the pleadings and may be modified only to prevent manifest injustice, with the burden on the moving party to show the injustice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Does a FRCP Rule 12 dismissal of a proper federal claim divest the district court of supplemental jurisdiction over pendent state law claims?", "answer": "No. It does not divest the district court of supplemental jurisdiction, but the court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction if it has dismissed all claims over which it had original jurisdiction."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "The plaintiff sues the defendant in federal district court on a proper federal claim and a state law claim. If the federal claim is dismissed, what can the court do regarding the state law claim?", "answer": "The court retains discretion to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claim or may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How can a defendant remove proceedings to federal court?", "answer": "A defendant can remove the proceedings by filing for removal within 30 days of the filing of the complaint. Federal question cases are removable without regard to the citizenship of the parties, but any other such action is removable only if none of the defendants are a citizen of the state where the claim is brought (forum-defendant rule in diversity suits)."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What are the two citizenships of a corporation for diversity purposes?", "answer": "A corporation is a citizen of (1) the state where it is incorporated and (2) the state where it has its principal place of business (nerve center where it makes its executive decisions, usually its headquarters)."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Paul claims $250,000 in damages against David, and Peter claims $50,000 in damages against David. If both Paul and Peter are diverse from David and both claims arise from the same facts, does the federal court have jurisdiction over Peter's claim?", "answer": "Yes. The federal court has supplemental jurisdiction over Peter's claim because Paul's claim meets the amount-in-controversy requirement and both claims arise from the same facts."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When does the court have diversity jurisdiction over a plaintiff's claims if the aggregate claims of at least one plaintiff meet the amount-in-controversy requirement?", "answer": "The court has diversity jurisdiction over that plaintiff's claims if the diversity-of-citizenship requirement is met, and it may have supplemental jurisdiction over the claims of any other plaintiff, even if those claims do not meet the amount-in-controversy requirement."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A third-party defendant counterclaims back against the third-party plaintiff, and the counterclaim is compulsory. Does the counterclaim need to independently meet the requirement for diversity suits?", "answer": "No. There is supplemental jurisdiction because compulsory counterclaims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence as the original claim, thus falling within the court's supplemental jurisdiction."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a party state as a counterclaim under the FRCP?", "answer": "A party must state as a counterclaim any claim that arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the opposing party's claim. If the counterclaim is compulsory, it is within the supplemental jurisdiction of the court."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can a plaintiff remove a case to federal court?", "answer": "No, only defendants can exercise the right of removal. A plaintiff cannot remove a case to federal court."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under what conditions may a defendant remove a case to federal court?", "answer": "A defendant may remove a case to federal court if (1) the federal court would have subject matter jurisdiction, (2) all defendants join in the petition, (3) no defendant is a resident of the forum state, and (4) removal is sought within 30 days after the defendant originally received service."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can two foreign aliens sue in federal court under diversity jurisdiction?", "answer": "No, two foreign aliens cannot sue in federal court under diversity jurisdiction, but a person domiciled in a state may sue a citizen of a foreign country in federal district court."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What are the requirements for diversity jurisdiction regarding party citizenship?", "answer": "Each party must be a citizen of a state or foreign country, but at least one party must be a US citizen."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "If the highest state court rules under both state and federal law, can the Supreme Court review the federal claim?", "answer": "No. The Supreme Court cannot review the federal claim because the issue has been decided on adequate and independent state grounds."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When can the U.S. Supreme Court review a state court judgment?", "answer": "The U.S. Supreme Court can review a state court judgment only if it rested on federal grounds. There is no Supreme Court review if the federal issue doesn't affect the outcome."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens if a claim asserts federal trademark infringement?", "answer": "It arises under federal law, and subject-matter jurisdiction is proper as a general federal-question action."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "If the defendant's activity in the forum state is sporadic and casual, can the state exercise personal jurisdiction over him?", "answer": "No, sporadic and casual activity is not enough to subject the defendant to personal jurisdiction. However, a single isolated contact is sufficient if the claim arises out of that contact."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under the FRCP and Due Process Clause, what must a defendant have before a state may exercise specific jurisdiction over him?", "answer": "A defendant must have minimum contacts with the forum state, and the claim must arise from those particular contacts."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A trustee from State B holding trust assets in State B is sued by a beneficiary residing in State A while the trustee is on vacation in State A. Can the trustee move to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction?", "answer": "Yes. The trustee can move to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction because minimum contacts cannot be satisfied unless there is some act where the defendant purposefully avails himself of the privilege of doing activities within the state."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a state's exercise of personal jurisdiction over a defendant comport with?", "answer": "It must comport with Due Process. A state may not exercise jurisdiction if the defendant's contacts with the state are negligible and non-deliberate, and the claim does not arise from those contacts."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A defendant from State B is sued in federal court in State A based on diversity, but the defendant has no contacts with State A. What should the defendant do?", "answer": "The defendant should move to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction and attach an affidavit about his lack of connection to State A."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What should a defendant do if seeking to have an action in federal court dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction?", "answer": "The defendant should file a motion along with any supporting legal arguments in an accompanying memorandum of law and any facts needed to support the motion by attaching affidavits, deposition transcripts, interrogatories, business records, or other evidentiary documents."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Does jurisdiction over a parent corporation automatically give jurisdiction over a subsidiary?", "answer": "No, jurisdiction over a parent corporation does not automatically give jurisdiction over a subsidiary unless the parent exerts substantial control over the subsidiary."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment not permit regarding foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations?", "answer": "It does not permit a state to exercise general personal jurisdiction over a foreign subsidiary if it lacks continuous and systematic business contacts with the state."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How long does a defendant have to answer the complaint if they agree to waive service?", "answer": "The defendant has 60 days from the date the plaintiff sent the waiver request to answer the complaint (90 days if the defendant is foreign)."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How long does a defendant have to decide whether to waive service if the complaint is accompanied by a request for waiver of service?", "answer": "The defendant has 30 days from the date of the waiver request to decide whether to waive service."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How long does a defendant have to respond to a complaint if formally served?", "answer": "The defendant has 21 days from the date of service to respond to the complaint."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What are the general rules for good cause in extending time for service?", "answer": "Good cause is measured against (1) the plaintiff's reasonable efforts to effect service and (2) the prejudice to the defendant from delay. Ignorance, forgetfulness, inadvertence, or misplaced reliance by an attorney are not good cause."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens if service is not made within 90 days after filing under FRCP Rule 4?", "answer": "The court must dismiss the action, but may extend the time for service for an appropriate period if the plaintiff demonstrates good cause for the failure to timely effect service."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How can an individual or corporate defendant be served?", "answer": "By following the state law for serving a summons in an action brought in courts of general jurisdiction in the state where the district court is located or where service is made."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can an individual defendant be served by delivering process to a third party found at the defendant's place of employment?", "answer": "No. An individual defendant may not be served by delivering process to a third party found at the defendant's place of employment."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "The plaintiff domiciled in State A brings a federal diversity action in State A for an accident in State B against the defendant who is incorporated and has its principal place of business in State B and operates in States A and B. Other passengers also injured have brought individual actions in State B federal court. If the defendant requests a transfer of venue to State B, will the motion be granted?", "answer": "Yes. The motion will be granted because State B appears to be the most convenient venue for the action."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under what conditions may a court transfer a case to another venue even if the original venue is proper?", "answer": "A court may transfer the case for the convenience of the parties or witnesses or in the interests of justice, provided the action could have been originally filed in the transferee district."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must be true for a case to be transferred to a transferee district?", "answer": "All defendants must be subject to personal jurisdiction in the transferee district, the transferee court must have had subject matter jurisdiction, and venue must be proper in the transferee district."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, when will a court decline to hear a case?", "answer": "A court will decline to hear a case when doing so would be seriously inconvenient for the parties, witnesses, and the court. Factors considered include access to evidence and convenience of witnesses, administrative efficiency, local interest in having local cases decided at home, and consideration of the burden on potential jurors. Whether a forum may be less favorable to the plaintiff is not relevant."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens if the parties' contract specifies one federal district court as the forum for litigating disputes, but the plaintiff files suit in a different federal district court?", "answer": "The defendant may seek to transfer the case to the court specified in the forum-selection clause by invoking the federal statute that permits transfers of venue for the convenience of the parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A defendant who has his office and principal place of business in State C is sued by a State B citizen in State A federal district court for an accident that happened in State A. Can the defendant transfer the case to State C district court?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can likely transfer the case to State C district court if the transfer is appropriate based on the convenience of the parties, the convenience of witnesses, and the interests of justice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must the movant establish to obtain a transfer of venue?", "answer": "The movant must establish: (1) that the action could have been brought in the district to which the movant seeks transfer (i.e., the proposed forum must have proper subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the defendants and proper venue); and (2) that the transfer is appropriate based on the convenience of the parties, the convenience of witnesses, and the interests of justice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under what conditions can a defendant remove a case from state court to federal court?", "answer": "A defendant can remove a case from state court to federal court if it could have been filed there originally, provided all defendants join in the petition for removal and so long as neither defendant is a citizen of the forum state. A corporation is deemed to be a citizen of the state in which it is incorporated and the jurisdiction in which it has its principal place of business."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When may any party move for judgment on the pleadings?", "answer": "After the pleadings are closed, any party may move for judgment on the pleadings, provided that the motion is made within such time as to not delay the trial. When a counterclaim is filed, the pleadings are closed at the time that an answer to the counterclaim is filed."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "If a plaintiff sues a defendant on a contract claim and the defendant moves for summary judgment, attaching affidavits and other evidence showing the contract was fully performed, what must the plaintiff do to oppose the summary judgment motion?", "answer": "The plaintiff must respond with evidence sufficient to establish a jury issue. Failure to respond entitles the defendant to judgment as a matter of law because there is no genuine dispute regarding any material fact."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must the party opposing a summary judgment motion do if the moving party has supported their motion with sufficient evidence?", "answer": "The party opposing summary judgment must respond with specific facts showing the existence of genuine issues of material fact for trial. Mere conclusory allegations do not serve to establish a genuine issue of material fact."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What can the court do under the FRCP to a pleading containing insufficient defenses or irrelevant materials?", "answer": "The court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter. A party may move to have stricken any defense that is not a legal defense along with any irrelevant materials from a pleading."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant be granted summary judgment if it is based on an assertion that the plaintiff is not credible?", "answer": "No. The defendant is not entitled to summary judgment because a factual dispute exists."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When may a district court grant judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) against a party under FRCP Rule 50?", "answer": "A district court may grant JMOL against a party if a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the party. JMOL is properly granted when, drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-movant, a reasonable jury could only have found for the movant."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is the time limit for filing certain motions under the FRCP after entry of judgment?", "answer": "The following motions must be filed within 28 days after entry of judgment: a motion for RJMOL, a motion for a new trial, a motion to amend judgment, a motion to amend findings of fact in a non-jury case, and a grant of a new trial on the court's initiative."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can summary judgment be granted when there is an issue as to a material fact that can't be resolved without observation of the witnesses to evaluate their credibility?", "answer": "No, summary judgment cannot be granted in such cases. However, summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute of material questions of fact."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Peter's estate claims that David drove his car into Peter's lane, causing Peter to swerve and drive off a cliff, killing Peter. If Peter's estate's only witness testifies that he heard a screech suggesting David swerved, but David calls three disinterested witnesses who saw the entire accident and state David never drove out of his lane, is summary judgment appropriate for David?", "answer": "Yes, summary judgment is appropriate for David because there is no genuine dispute of material fact given the overwhelming testimony from disinterested witnesses."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens if a JMOL motion is originally made before the verdict and then renewed after the jury has rendered its verdict?", "answer": "The motion is called a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law (RJMOL), and the standard applied is the same as that for a directed verdict. An RJMOL is appropriate if no reasonable jury could have reached the given verdict."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When may either party move for a judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) during a trial?", "answer": "At the close of the other party's case, but before the case is submitted to the jury, either party may move for JMOL if the opponent has presented no substantial evidence to support a jury verdict in their favor. The evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under what conditions can a motion for a new trial be granted?", "answer": "A motion for a new trial will not be granted unless the verdict is against the great and clear weight of the evidence and there is a firm conviction that the trier of fact made a mistake."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a party do to seek judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) during a trial?", "answer": "A party must make a motion for JMOL at the close of evidence and before the case is submitted to the jury. If a party does not timely move for JMOL at trial, they waive their right to move for RJMOL after the verdict is rendered."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When can a motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) be granted?", "answer": "A motion for JMOL can be granted only if the court determines that the evidence is legally insufficient to allow the jury to decide the case."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "If a plaintiff's action in federal court is dismissed with prejudice after a settlement with the defendant, and the plaintiff later learns of a mistake in the settlement amount, can the plaintiff reopen the judgment 16 months later?", "answer": "No. The motion to reopen the judgment will be dismissed because it was not filed within one year of the court's entry of judgment."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is the only method provided by FRCP Rule 60 for attacking a judgment without appealing?", "answer": "A party must make a Rule 60 motion within a reasonable time, and for grounds of mistake, inadvertence, or newly discovered evidence, the motion must be made within one year after entry of the judgment."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "If a trial court improperly admits testimony attacking the defendant's character, what should the defendant do?", "answer": "The defendant should raise any preserved evidentiary objections as a ground for a new trial because if there is an appeal and the appellate court agrees, it will order the case remanded for a new trial."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under what conditions may a new trial be granted to correct an erroneous ruling on the admissibility of evidence?", "answer": "A new trial may be granted if the error was prejudicial and was the subject of a timely objection."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "If a defendant is found liable in a civil trial due to a criminal conviction, and the criminal judgment is reversed, what should the defendant do?", "answer": "The defendant should promptly move for relief from the final judgment in the civil case, and the district court may reverse the final judgment based on the reversal of the criminal conviction."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Under FRCP Rule 60, when can a final judgment be reversed?", "answer": "A final judgment can be reversed if the prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is required for a judgment to be reopened based on fraud or misconduct?", "answer": "A motion for relief from judgment based on fraud or misconduct must be filed within one year of entry of judgment. The movant must establish that the party has a meritorious defense or claim to present if relief is granted."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Does seeking equitable relief in addition to legal relief eliminate the right to a jury trial?", "answer": "No, seeking equitable relief in addition to legal relief does not eliminate the right to a jury trial. Every legal issue, whether or not incidental to an equitable claim, carries the right to a jury trial."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does the Seventh Amendment provide regarding the right to a jury trial?", "answer": "The Seventh Amendment provides for the right to a jury trial in suits at law, but there is no constitutional right to a jury trial in suits of equity. Whether a suit is in law or equity depends on the remedy sought."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must be tried first if legal and equitable claims are joined in one action involving common fact issues?", "answer": "The legal claim should be tried first to the jury, and then the equitable claim to the court."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does the Seventh Amendment provide regarding the right to a jury trial with respect to legal claims in federal courts?", "answer": "There is an absolute right to a jury trial with respect to legal claims in federal courts, and when legal and equitable claims are joined, the legal claims must be tried prior to equitable ones."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must be done if the plaintiff sues for injunctive relief based on a contract and the defendant counterclaims for damages based on breach of the contract?", "answer": "The court must hold a jury trial on the legal counterclaim first because the plaintiff's right to injunctive relief would be premised upon the legal question of whether or not the defendant was in breach of the contract."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "The plaintiff does not request a jury in his complaint and then amends the complaint to add new issues before the defendant answers. The plaintiff makes a jury demand for both the old issues and the new issues in the amended complaint. Is this valid?", "answer": "Yes. This is valid for the old issues because the answer hasn't been filed yet and for the new issues due to the amendment."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When must a demand for a jury trial be made?", "answer": "A demand for a jury trial must be made within 14 days after service of the complaint or answer. If one amends a pleading, the amendment does not change the time to file a demand for a jury trial, but if the amendment adds new issues, the party gets 14 more days to file a demand for a jury on the new issues."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How many jurors must participate in a verdict under the FRCP?", "answer": "Under the FRCP, a minimum of 6 jurors and a maximum of 12 jurors must participate in a verdict unless the parties otherwise stipulate. The verdict must be unanimous, and no verdict will be taken from a jury that is reduced in size to fewer than 6 members."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "In a federal patent case, can the parties agree that a unanimous decision is not necessary and stipulate to fewer than 6 jurors?", "answer": "Yes. In a federal patent case, the parties can agree that a unanimous decision is not necessary and stipulate to fewer than 6 jurors."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How many members must a federal civil jury have?", "answer": "A federal civil jury must begin with at least 6 and no more than 12 members, and the verdict must be unanimous unless stipulated otherwise by the parties. The parties can agree that a unanimous decision is not necessary and may also stipulate to fewer than 6 jurors."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does a challenge for cause require?", "answer": "A challenge for cause requires the court's objective determination as to whether the potential juror meets the statutory qualifications for jury duty. The court will consider only a potential juror's relationship to one of the litigants or evidence of bias or prejudice regarding one of the litigants."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a party do to preserve an objection to jury instructions for appeal?", "answer": "A party must object to jury instructions on the record, stating distinctly the matter objected to and the grounds of the objection to preserve the issue for appeal. Otherwise, the appeal can only be successful if the instruction affected the party's substantial rights, meeting the standard for plain error."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a party show to establish plain error?", "answer": "To establish plain error, a party must show: (1) an error; (2) that is plain; and (3) that affects substantial rights. The error must be a clear deviation from an applicable legal rule under current law and must have been prejudicial or affected the outcome of the proceeding."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When must a party object to a proposed jury instruction under the FRCP?", "answer": "A party must object to a proposed jury instruction at the time the court informs it of the proposed instruction, or at the earliest time to object. Failure to properly object means the issue is not preserved for appellate review, and only the plain error standard of review applies."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Are errors in jury instructions waived without timely objections?", "answer": "Yes, errors in jury instructions are generally waived without timely objections. However, an obvious and substantial error may be reversible even without a timely objection if it made an obviously incorrect statement of law that was probably responsible for an incorrect verdict, leading to substantial injustice."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is the Klaxon rule?", "answer": "The Klaxon rule states that a federal district court sitting in diversity must apply the choice-of-law approach prevailing in the state in which it sits. This ensures that a federal court sitting in diversity and the state court sitting next door would reach the same result if presented with the same case."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens when there is a conflict between a state rule and a valid rule under the FRCP?", "answer": "When there is a conflict between a state rule and a valid rule under the FRCP, the FRCP trumps without regard to the purpose underlying the conflicting state rule."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does the Supremacy Clause require?", "answer": "The Supremacy Clause requires federal law to govern over any conflicting state law, meaning that a federal rule, established within the limits of the Constitution, prevails over conflicting state law, provided the federal rule is sufficiently broad to cover the issue."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What are the elements required to preclude a claim?", "answer": "A claim can be precluded if: (1) there was a valid, final judgment on the merits in the first action; (2) the second action is between the same parties or their privies; and (3) the second action involves the same claim or cause of action."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "In a federal diversity action, how does a court determine which state's laws to apply?", "answer": "In a federal diversity action, a court must look to the choice-of-law rules of the state in which it sits to determine which of the two competing states' laws should be applied to the action before it."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does the Erie Doctrine state?", "answer": "Under the Erie Doctrine, in diversity cases, the court applies the substantive law of the state where the court sits and federal procedural law, unless the state procedural law would result in important differences whereby the court uses state procedural law."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does FRCP Rule 54 allow for?", "answer": "FRCP Rule 54 allows for an appeal when there is a final judgment on one claim even though there are still other claims in the same suit. This partial judgment can be immediately appealed if the court expressly determines in the order for final judgment that there is no just reason for delay."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is the final judgment rule?", "answer": "The final judgment rule states that parties can only appeal from a final judgment on all claims in the action. In certifying partial judgment for immediate appeal, the district court must explain its reasons, keeping in mind the need to avoid piecemeal appeals and to certify claims only when they constitute separate and distinct questions of law and fact."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is the nature of summary judgments?", "answer": "Summary judgments are binding and final on the merits, providing a basis for appeal when granted. However, the denial of a summary judgment motion is not a final decision and does not provide a basis for appeal."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can a party in federal court appeal a denial of a motion for lack of personal jurisdiction before the trial?", "answer": "No. A party in federal court cannot appeal a denial of a motion for lack of personal jurisdiction until after the trial on the merits because the appeal is interlocutory."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Are there constitutional limits on punitive damages awards?", "answer": "Yes. Constitutional limits are placed on a state's ability to award punitive damages, and due process prohibits imposing grossly excessive punitive damage awards. Whether there is sufficient evidence to support a jury's punitive damages award is a question of law reviewed de novo."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What can a judge do to cure a prejudicial error such as an improper jury instruction?", "answer": "A judge can order a new trial to cure a prejudicial error such as an improper jury instruction."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How are questions about the exclusion of evidence reviewed on appeal?", "answer": "Questions about whether evidence should have been excluded because it was irrelevant or highly prejudicial are reviewed using an abuse-of-discretion standard."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can any judgment, including a default judgment, be vacated?", "answer": "Yes. Any judgment, including a default judgment, can be vacated by the court that entered it. The FRCP provides several possible grounds for setting aside a judgment, including that the judgment is void. A judgment is void if it is so affected by a fundamental infirmity that it may be raised even after the judgment becomes final."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A plaintiff sues a defendant and the defendant answers and files a counterclaim. If the plaintiff doesn't answer the counterclaim, can the clerk enter a default judgment?", "answer": "No. Only the judge can enter a default judgment on the counterclaim because the plaintiff has appeared in the action by filing the complaint."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When can the court clerk enter a default judgment?", "answer": "The court clerk can enter a default judgment only if the claim is for a sum certain and the defaulting party neither filed a responsive pleading nor appeared in the action."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "A defendant is served with a complaint and files a motion to dismiss but fails to answer the complaint. If the plaintiff later seeks a default judgment, what notice must be given to the defendant?", "answer": "The defendant or his representative must be served with written notice of the application at least 7 days before the hearing."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What notice must be given if a defendant has appeared in the action but defaults in some other way?", "answer": "If a defendant has appeared in the action but defaults in some other way, he is entitled to 7 days' notice of the hearing on the plaintiff's motion for judgment."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When can a plaintiff voluntarily dismiss his action as a matter of right?", "answer": "A plaintiff can voluntarily dismiss his action as a matter of right before an answer or motion for summary judgment is served on the plaintiff by either filing a written notice of dismissal or entering into a stipulation with the defendant. A plaintiff can only dismiss a cause of action once without prejudice; a second dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "How are findings of fact in a bench trial treated on appeal?", "answer": "Findings of fact in a bench trial will not be set aside on appeal unless they were clearly erroneous. These findings can be stated orally by the judge and recorded in open court following the close of the evidence."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What must a judge do at the conclusion of a nonjury bench trial?", "answer": "At the conclusion of a nonjury bench trial, the judge must make findings of fact and conclusions of law either orally on the record or in a filed memorandum of decision, followed by a written judgment."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does FRCP Rule 13 allow?", "answer": "FRCP Rule 13 allows a party to make counterclaims against an opposing party who has filed a claim against the party. A counterclaim is compulsory if it arises out of the same transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiff's claim."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When does an order of dismissal have res judicata effect?", "answer": "An order of dismissal is entitled to res judicata effect if the circumstances indicate it is on the merits or with prejudice to relitigation of the earlier claim. If the court specifies that a dismissal is without prejudice, res judicata does not preclude assertion of the same claim or issue in a second proceeding."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What is nonmutual issue preclusion?", "answer": "Nonmutual issue preclusion occurs when someone who was not a party to the first case uses the judgment for issue preclusion against someone who was a party to the first case. Courts base their determination on whether the plaintiff in the second suit could have easily joined in the first action, whether there are procedural opportunities available to the defendant in the second suit that were unavailable in the earlier action, and whether the defendant had incentive to litigate the issue in the first action."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What happens if a plaintiff loses his case against a defendant?", "answer": "If a plaintiff loses his case against a defendant, all possible grounds for relief arising out of the same transaction or occurrence are barred in future litigation between the same parties due to claim preclusion."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When is a private entity considered a state actor?", "answer": "A private entity is considered a state actor if there is a close nexus between the state and the entity, so that the action of the latter may be fairly treated as that of the state itself. The private entity must be exercising powers traditionally and exclusively reserved to the government to be considered a state actor."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Does private property lose its private nature if the public is invited onto it?", "answer": "No. Private property does not lose its private nature just because the public is invited onto it, and any private store can exclude individuals trying to assert their First Amendment rights."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Do the First and Fourteenth Amendments apply to private entities?", "answer": "Generally, the First and Fourteenth Amendments apply only to the actions of governments and government officials, not to the actions of privately owned companies. However, courts have found state action where the government is significantly involved in the private entity or the private actor has exercised a public function."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can an association discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or sex if it is regarded as an agency of the state?", "answer": "No. If an association is regarded as an agency of the state, it must comport with the constitution and cannot discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or sex."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Can the Equal Protection Clause apply to private citizens?", "answer": "Yes. While the Equal Protection Clause forbids only governmental discrimination, it may apply to a private citizen if that person is an agent of the state and acting in that capacity."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "When does state action exist in a private company?", "answer": "State action exists if a state encourages and facilitates discriminating acts in a private company."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does the 13th Amendment address?", "answer": "The 13th Amendment addresses private acts of racial discrimination."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "What does the 13th Amendment prohibit?", "answer": "The 13th Amendment prohibits public and private discrimination in housing."}
{"topic": "Civil Procedure", "question": "Does the Fourteenth Amendment apply to federal action?", "answer": "No. The Fourteenth Amendment does not directly apply to federal action, only to state action."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Displaying a bumper sticker on a vehicle is symbolic political speech. May it be regulated unless the state shows a compelling need closely related to the regulation?", "answer": "No. It may not be regulated unless the state shows a compelling need closely related to the regulation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is licensure by a government body sufficient to make an individual a state actor?", "answer": "No. Licensure by a government body does not make an individual a state actor."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the requirement for forced sterilization of habitual criminals to be constitutional?", "answer": "Forced sterilization of habitual criminals is unconstitutional because there is no equal protection of the law due to the irrational differentiation of crimes that qualify for sterilization along with the fact that the fundamental right of procreation is at stake."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a pharmacist is found guilty of the crime of selling narcotics without a prescription, can the pharmacist's license be revoked without an opportunity for a trial-type hearing?", "answer": "Yes. The pharmacist's license can be revoked without an opportunity for a trial-type hearing before revoking the license."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Congress enacts a statute to provide new agricultural subsidies to eligible farmers on a discretionary basis. If a farmer applies for the subsidy but his application is denied by the federal agency administering the subsidies, does the farmer have a due process right to a hearing?", "answer": "No. The farmer has no due process rights because the statute gives the agency discretion in selecting subsidy recipients."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A private college receives 30% of its funding from the state and fires an employee for uploading a denouncement on the high cost of education. Can the employee recover on First Amendment grounds?", "answer": "No. The private employer's action cannot be imputed to the state for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A federal law requires new security measures in airports that apply only to individuals of one race. Is this constitutional?", "answer": "No. It is unconstitutional unless the government can prove the racial classification is necessary to serve a compelling public interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A minor seeks to have an abortion. Is a state law requiring parental notification constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A state law requiring parental notification is constitutional if the minor may seek a judicial bypass where the minor petitions a judge to authorize her physician to perform an abortion without parental notification if the judge finds the minor is mature and capable of giving informed consent."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a licensing ordinance give licensees a property interest in being free of competition from additional licensees?", "answer": "No. Licensees do not have a right to demand a hearing for the purpose of objecting to additional licensees."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a person have the right under due process of law to confront and cross-examine witnesses in administrative proceedings that substantially impact that person's property interests?", "answer": "Yes. A person has the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses in such administrative proceedings."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "With the overturn of Roe v. Wade, are abortion policies and reproductive rights in the hands of each state?", "answer": "Yes. Abortion policies and reproductive rights are now in the hands of each state, enabling individual states to ban abortion or adopt abortion restrictions."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review when a governmental action affects fundamental rights such as marriage, child-bearing, and child-rearing?", "answer": "The court will use strict scrutiny, and the burden of persuasion is on the state to show the law is necessary to achieve a compelling government purpose and is the least restrictive alternative."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review for a state statute that permanently removes children from their parents due to child abuse?", "answer": "The statute is subject to strict scrutiny and must be narrowly tailored to advance a compelling state interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do government employees of the state have a right to be rehired after their probationary period expires if state law does not require it?", "answer": "No. Government employees of the state do not have a right to be rehired after their probationary period expires if state law does not require it, nor is there a requirement for a statement of reasons or an opportunity for a hearing."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state statute banning contraceptive sales to minors constitutional?", "answer": "No. A state statute banning contraceptive sales to minors may be unconstitutional because it denies minors one of their fundamental rights without due process."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do probationary employees of a state agency have a right to be re-hired if state law does not require it?", "answer": "No. Probationary employees of a state agency do not have a right to be re-hired if state law does not require it, although procedural due process may require a hearing if the employee relied on an oral promise from the employer."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do probationary employees of a state agency have a right to be re-hired after their probationary period expires if state law does not require it?", "answer": "No. Probationary employees of a state agency do not have a right to be re-hired after their probationary period expires if state law does not require it, nor is there a requirement for a statement of reasons or an opportunity for a hearing."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state passes a law that exempts a debtor's home from judgment creditors only if the debtor has lived in the state for at least two years. Does this law trigger strict scrutiny?", "answer": "Yes. This law may trigger strict scrutiny under both the Equal Protection and the Privileges or Immunities Clauses if the benefit is deemed sufficiently vital or important."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What are the conditions under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for an individual to enjoy the same privileges and immunities as other citizens of the state?", "answer": "An individual has a fundamental right to migrate from state to state. As such, durational residency requirements involving important government benefits or privileges are subject to strict scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is licensing of persons who deal with the general public a valid exercise of the state's police power?", "answer": "Yes. Licensing of persons who deal with the general public is a valid exercise of the state's police power and is subject to low-level, rational basis scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What must a plaintiff show to survive rational basis review of a state requirement for a mechanic to have a certain amount of experience as a precondition for securing a license?", "answer": "To survive rational basis review, the plaintiff must show that the measure serves no legitimate government interest or is not rationally related to any legitimate interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a wealthy school district raises substantially more tax revenue for education than a poor school district, does this involve a fundamental right?", "answer": "No. If a wealthy school district raises substantially more tax revenue for education than a poor school district, no fundamental right is involved and the claim will be subject to rational basis review."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is there a fundamental right to education guaranteed in the Constitution?", "answer": "No. There is no fundamental right to education guaranteed in the Constitution, and the Equal Protection Clause does not require exact equality or precisely equal advantages among school districts."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state give reduced benefits to new residents who have lived in the state for less than 2 months versus full benefits provided to other residents?", "answer": "No. A state cannot give reduced benefits to new residents who have lived in the state for less than 2 months versus full benefits provided to other residents."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review for durational residency requirements for dispensing government benefits under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?", "answer": "Durational residency requirements for dispensing government benefits are subject to strict scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard for economic regulations and wealth discrimination?", "answer": "Economic regulations and wealth discrimination need only satisfy the rational-basis standard."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard for a state law that impairs the obligations of an existing contract under the Contracts Clause?", "answer": "The court examines three factors to determine if the law is constitutional: (1) has the law substantially impaired an obligation of an existing contract; (2) does the government have a significant and legitimate reason for the impairment; and (3) is the law based on reasonable conditions and is it appropriate to the public purpose underlying the law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state terminate parental rights if the child is subjected to real physical or emotional harm?", "answer": "Yes. A state can terminate parental rights if the child is subjected to real physical or emotional harm and allowing the parent-child relationship to continue is more severe than the consequences of termination."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What must be balanced in a state's interest in protecting children against a parent's interest in raising their children in an environment free from government interference?", "answer": "The state's interest in protecting children must be balanced against a parent's interest in raising their children in an environment free from government interference. This fundamental right to family integrity requires that a state's termination of parental rights be subject to strict scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can states impose a 1-year residency requirement for children to attend public schools in the state?", "answer": "No. States cannot impose a 1-year residency requirement for children to attend public schools in the state."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can states impose a 1-year residency requirement for lower tuition at state universities or charge higher fees to non-residents to obtain a hunting license?", "answer": "Yes. States can impose a 1-year residency requirement for lower tuition at state universities or charge higher fees to non-residents to obtain a hunting license because these interests do not involve the \"necessities of life\" and are not considered \"fundamental rights.\""}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard for the imposition of minimum durational residency requirements as a basis for receipt of state benefits under the Equal Protection Clause?", "answer": "The imposition of minimum durational residency requirements as a basis for receipt of state benefits generally violates the Equal Protection Clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a school dress code prohibiting students from wearing V-neck shirts constitutional if it promotes an educational environment?", "answer": "Yes. A school dress code prohibiting students from wearing V-neck shirts is constitutional if it promotes an educational environment, is rationally related to a legitimate state interest, and there is no evidence showing a discriminatory purpose."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What are the conditions for a school dress code or uniform policy to be constitutional?", "answer": "A school dress code or uniform policy is constitutional if it: (1) is authorized under state law; (2) advances an important government interest; (3) is not related to the suppression of free expression; and (4) only incidentally restricts free expression in a minimal fashion."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the exclusion of aliens from service on grand and petit jury panels in state and federal courts deny resident aliens equal protection?", "answer": "No. The exclusion of aliens from service on grand and petit jury panels in state and federal courts does not deny resident aliens equal protection."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state law requiring U.S. citizenship for jury service constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A state law requiring U.S. citizenship for jury service is constitutional because the state has a legitimate interest in restricting jury service to those who will be loyal to, interested in, and familiar with the customs of this country."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review for a person's decision to marry?", "answer": "A person's decision to marry is a fundamental right requiring strict scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review for state regulations that unduly burden the right to marry without a compelling state interest?", "answer": "Any state regulation that unduly burdens the right to marry without a compelling state interest fails strict scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do parents have a fundamental right to control the upbringing and education of their children?", "answer": "Yes. Parents have a fundamental right to control the upbringing and education of their children."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a statute that requires mandatory attendance of a public school for children constitutional?", "answer": "No. A statute that requires mandatory attendance of a public school for children is unconstitutional because it fails strict scrutiny by unreasonably infringing with the liberty of parents to direct the education of their children through private school or homeschooling."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review for an ordinance that requires baby-sitters to obtain a license?", "answer": "The ordinance must be rationally related to a legitimate government objective and does not trigger heightened scrutiny even though the ordinance will disproportionately affect women more than men because there is no evidence of sex discrimination."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review for legislation or government action that discriminates against a non-suspect class?", "answer": "The rational basis test is triggered when legislation or government action discriminates against a non-suspect class, with the exception of sex/gender discrimination which requires intermediate scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a statute that requires medical diagnostic centers to be affiliated with hospitals constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A statute that requires medical diagnostic centers to be affiliated with hospitals is constitutional because it is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. The statute does not trigger heightened judicial scrutiny because it neither classifies regulatory subjects on a constitutionally suspect basis nor unduly burdens the exercise of a fundamental right."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard for a panel selection process that permits gender-based classifications?", "answer": "A panel selection process that permits gender-based classifications warrants intermediate scrutiny and must serve an important government objective and be substantially related to that objective."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a complex state system that limits access to the ballot to effectively preclude a new political party violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. A complex state system that limits access to the ballot to effectively preclude a new political party violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state statute that requires a certain percentage of state contracts to be awarded to minorities constitutional?", "answer": "No. A state statute that requires a certain percentage of state contracts to be awarded to minorities is unconstitutional as violative of the Equal Protection Clause unless it is to vindicate a compelling government interest to redress past discrimination."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are state statutory presumptions that students are not residents, making them ineligible to vote, constitutional?", "answer": "No. State statutory presumptions that students are not residents, making them ineligible to vote, are unconstitutional because there are less restrictive means by which the state could be assured that only actual residents of a community vote in its elections."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard for a law that bars the right to inherit by an illegitimate child?", "answer": "A law that bars the right to inherit by an illegitimate child must be substantially related to an important government objective to not violate equal protection."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the burden of proof for a state in a challenge of a state statute that prevents resident aliens from being employed by the state?", "answer": "The state has the burden of demonstrating that the citizenship requirement is necessary to advance an important state interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is the distribution by the state of free textbooks to schools that promote racial segregation constitutional?", "answer": "No. The distribution by the state of free textbooks to schools that promote racial segregation may be unconstitutional as violative of the Equal Protection rights against discrimination."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is the distribution by the state of free textbooks to schools that promote racial segregation a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. The distribution by the state of free textbooks to schools that promote racial segregation may violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the strongest ground to challenge a state requirement that people seeking work licenses must have been residents of the state for at least two years?", "answer": "The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is the strongest ground to challenge such a state requirement."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a state enforcing a deed restriction that bars the sale of the property to anyone under 21 violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. A state enforcing a deed restriction that bars the sale of the property to anyone under 21 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state requirement that candidates for licenses must be U.S. citizens constitutional?", "answer": "No. A state requirement that candidates for licenses must be U.S. citizens is unconstitutional as a denial of equal protection."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a state requirement that residents must be literate in order to vote violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. A state requirement that residents must be literate in order to vote violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a state statute allowing only landowners to vote in a referendum concerning the establishment of a watershed improvement district violate the Equal Protection Clause?", "answer": "No. A state statute allowing only landowners to vote in a referendum concerning the establishment of a watershed improvement district does not violate the Equal Protection Clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state statute that distinguishes between common carriers and private individuals in economic-related legislation constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A state statute that distinguishes between common carriers and private individuals in economic-related legislation is constitutional as long as there is a rational basis for the differentiation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a restriction of state tuition assistance to only U.S. citizens or resident aliens seeking citizenship valid?", "answer": "No. A restriction of state tuition assistance to only U.S. citizens or resident aliens seeking citizenship is invalid because the justifications for this restriction are insufficient to overcome the burden imposed on a state when it uses such an alienage classification."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the strongest argument against a state law that disinherits illegitimate unacknowledged children?", "answer": "The strongest argument against a state law that disinherits illegitimate unacknowledged children is that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause because it is not substantially related to an important governmental objective."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the strongest argument in favor of a state law that disinherits illegitimate unacknowledged children?", "answer": "The strongest argument in favor of a state law that disinherits illegitimate unacknowledged children is that the state's interest in promoting family life and in encouraging the formal acknowledgment of paternity gives the law a rational basis."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard for a statute that discriminates based on age under the Fifth Amendment Equal Protection Clause?", "answer": "A statute that discriminates based on age may be in violation of the Fifth Amendment Equal Protection Clause if there is no relationship between age and the requirements of the statute."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state gives grants to citizens but not to aliens. What is the standard of review for this action?", "answer": "This action must meet strict scrutiny and must be necessary to advance a compelling state interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A regulation is about traffic. Can the government request an exaction for a new use permit?", "answer": "The government must show that the new use will actually affect traffic, and the exaction must be proportional to the increase caused by the new use."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What are the conditions under which a local government may exact promises from a developer without violating the Takings Clause?", "answer": "A local government may exact promises from a developer without violating the Takings Clause if there is: (1) an essential nexus between legitimate state interests and the conditions imposed on the property owner; and (2) a rough proportionality between the burden imposed by the conditions on the property owner and the impact of the proposed development."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state law intended to promote tourism creates an easement across a portion of a private farm for hikers to get to a local waterfall. Is this an unconstitutional taking?", "answer": "Yes. This is an unconstitutional taking of the farm owner's property because it impacts the owner's right to exclusive possession of his property and requires compensation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are zoning restrictions that reduce property value considered a taking?", "answer": "No. Zoning restrictions that reduce property value are not a taking if they substantially advance legitimate state interests and are not a deprivation of a core property right. However, a statute that extinguishes a fundamental attribute of property ownership is an unconstitutional taking."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the definition of public use under the Takings Clause?", "answer": "Public use is defined broadly as 'public benefit' or 'public welfare,' and so long as the taking is rationally related to a legitimate public purpose, the public use requirement will be satisfied."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "When is a governmental land-use regulation considered a taking?", "answer": "A governmental land-use regulation is considered a taking if it denies substantially all practical uses of a property, requiring compensation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If the government makes or authorizes a permanent physical occupation of private property, does this result in a taking?", "answer": "Yes. Any permanent physical occupation of private property authorized by the government automatically results in a taking, regardless of the interference's extent or the government's interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A local government regulation eliminates a property owner's investment-backed expectation and economic value of the property. Is this a taking under the Fifth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. This is a taking under the Fifth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are zoning ordinances a legitimate exercise of the police power?", "answer": "Yes. Zoning ordinances are a legitimate exercise of the police power if rationally related to a legitimate state interest such as health or safety."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can the power of eminent domain be delegated to a private entity?", "answer": "Yes. The power of eminent domain can be delegated to a private entity as long as the property is taken for public use and just compensation is paid."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What does the Ex Post Facto Clause prohibit?", "answer": "The Ex Post Facto Clause prohibits laws that retroactively alter the definition of crimes or increase the punishment for criminal acts."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is a bill of attainder?", "answer": "A bill of attainder is a legislative act that inflicts punishment on named individuals or on easily identifiable members of groups without a trial."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What are ex post facto laws?", "answer": "Ex post facto laws are laws that operate retroactively to: (1) make criminal an act that when done was not criminal; (2) aggravate a crime or increase the punishment; (3) change the rules of evidence to the detriment of criminal defendants as a class; or (4) alter the law of criminal procedure to deprive criminal defendants of a substantive right."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A statute enacted by Congress names specific individuals and provides that they cannot hold any position of employment within the federal government because they are suspected terrorists. Is this an unconstitutional bill of attainder?", "answer": "Yes. This is an unconstitutional bill of attainder because it singles out particular individuals for punishment without a trial."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is state legislation intended to deprive a state employee of a salary because of his objectionable conduct constitutional?", "answer": "No. This is an unconstitutional bill of attainder because it inflicts punishment on a person without a trial."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the Privileges and Immunities Clause apply to actions by a state that discriminate against its own residents?", "answer": "No. The Privileges and Immunities Clause only applies to actions by a state that discriminate against citizens of other states."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a state statute that discriminates against nonresidents violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV?", "answer": "Yes. A state statute that discriminates against nonresidents violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV unless the statute is specifically aimed to address a problem caused by nonresidents."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "When is a requirement imposed by a municipality on the issuance of a building permit unconstitutional?", "answer": "A requirement imposed by a municipality on the issuance of a building permit is unconstitutional if the municipality cannot demonstrate a rough proportionality between the requirement and the impact of the proposed action on the community."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A person is charged under a state statute that makes blasphemy a criminal act but the statute is rarely enforced. Does the application of the statute deny him equal protection of the laws?", "answer": "Yes. The application of the statute denies him equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state enact a statute impairing the obligations of existing contracts?", "answer": "No. The Contracts Clause of the Constitution prohibits a state from enacting a statute impairing the obligations of existing contracts."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a one-year residency requirement to obtain a divorce constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A one-year residency requirement to obtain a divorce is constitutional as it promotes a compelling state interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a police power argument outweigh a contracts clause violation argument?", "answer": "Generally, yes. A police power argument will outweigh a contracts clause violation argument."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the standard of review for residency requirements which impair the fundamental right to travel?", "answer": "Residency requirements which impair the fundamental right to travel are subject to strict scrutiny."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is a Bill of Attainder?", "answer": "A Bill of Attainder is a legislative act that inflicts punishment without a judicial trial on individuals who are designated either by name or in terms of past conduct."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a newly passed law that impairs the rights of bondholders constitutional?", "answer": "No. A newly passed law that impairs the rights of bondholders is in violation of the Contracts Clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a commuter tax on non-resident taxpayers violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. A commuter tax on non-resident taxpayers violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What does the Contracts Clause do?", "answer": "The Contracts Clause invalidates retroactive state laws that impair an existing contractual obligation. This never applies to the federal government."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What rights does the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment cover?", "answer": "The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment covers the right to travel freely from state to state, the right to vote for national officers, the right to assemble, and the right to petition Congress for redress."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What does the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2 prohibit?", "answer": "The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2 prohibits state discrimination against non-residents with respect to essential activities or basic rights unless the discrimination is closely related to a substantial government purpose."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are corporations protected by the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Comity clause, and the Fifth Amendment prohibition against self-incrimination?", "answer": "No. The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Comity clause, and the Fifth Amendment prohibition against self-incrimination are not applicable to corporations."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the Privileges and Immunities Clause restrict the federal government?", "answer": "No. The Privileges and Immunities Clause restricts states, not the federal government."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the burden on the state when the government conditions a permit upon a public benefit?", "answer": "When the government conditions a permit upon a public benefit, the burden is on the state to demonstrate the proportionality of the burden on the landowner to the benefit of the state."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can state legislation modify the rights and responsibilities in a private contract under the Contracts Clause?", "answer": "Yes. The rights and responsibilities in a private contract can be modified by state legislation that serves an important and legitimate state public interest, is necessary for the achievement of that public interest, and is a reasonable non-substantial impairment of the contract."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What does the Free Exercise Clause prohibit and what are the limitations of challenging a neutral law of general applicability?", "answer": "The Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government from imposing restrictions on someone based on their religious beliefs. Such restrictions may only be imposed if they are necessary to achieve a compelling state interest. However, the Free Exercise Clause cannot be used to challenge a neutral law of general applicability. As long as the government has a rational basis for a neutral law of general applicability, and the law isn't specifically directed towards a religion, it is constitutional."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a state passes a law to sell property to a church significantly below fair market value, what must the Court consider?", "answer": "The Court must consider whether such government action violates the Establishment Clause by reference to historical practices and understandings. For example, it is a violation of the Establishment Clause to exempt a specific religion from certain taxes or give that religion a significant benefit because no one religion should be given preference over the others."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What must a challenger show to establish a violation of the Free Exercise Clause?", "answer": "To establish a violation of the Free Exercise Clause, the challenger must show that the government action specifically targeted the religious practice in question."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does sponsoring or including prayer in public school events or ceremonies violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. Sponsoring or including prayer in public school events or ceremonies violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, even when the prayer is nondenominational and participation is voluntary."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a nativity scene or another primarily-religious symbol standing by itself violate the Establishment Clause?", "answer": "Yes. A nativity scene or another primarily-religious symbol that stands by itself and is not surrounded by other secular displays is regarded as having a primarily religious effect, and thus violates the Establishment Clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state law requiring an autopsy of anyone who dies suspiciously constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A state law requiring an autopsy of anyone who dies suspiciously is constitutional because it is a neutral, generally applicable statute and rationally related to a legitimate state purpose."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is federal aid to all teachers except religion teachers constitutional?", "answer": "No. Federal aid to all teachers except religion teachers is an undue governmental entanglement in religious affairs because of the need to police the restriction."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is federal aid to religious colleges an undue governmental entanglement in religious affairs?", "answer": "No. Federal aid to religious colleges is not an undue governmental entanglement in religious affairs because aid to one aspect of a religious college that is not extensively sectarian does not necessarily mean the college will spend its other resources for religious purposes."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a sincere religious belief an adequate constitutional defense to cruelty to animals?", "answer": "No. A sincere religious belief is not an adequate constitutional defense to cruelty to animals."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is government financial assistance given to post-secondary religious schools for secular use constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. Government financial assistance given to post-secondary religious schools for secular use is constitutional, but it does not necessarily free the school to spend its other resources for religious purposes."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can the state distribute free textbooks to all schools, including private schools that offer religious instruction?", "answer": "Yes. The distribution by the state of free textbooks to all schools, including private schools that offer religious instruction, may be constitutional if it is secular, neither advances nor inhibits religion, and does not entangle church and state."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can courts test the truth or falsity of religious beliefs under the First and Fourteenth Amendments?", "answer": "No. Testing in court the truth or falsity of religious beliefs is barred by the First and Fourteenth Amendments; courts must not make any type of ecclesiastical determination."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are ordinances and zoning restrictions on the sizes and placement of outdoor advertisements within the police power of states and municipalities?", "answer": "Yes. Ordinances and zoning restrictions on the sizes and placement of outdoor advertisements are well within the police power of states and municipalities. Regulations of a sign's physical structure and location are content-neutral and subject to intermediate scrutiny, which requires that the regulation be narrowly tailored to serve the government's legitimate and substantial interest, but it need not be the least restrictive or the least intrusive means of doing so."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is an ordinance that bans public nudity constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. An ordinance that bans public nudity is constitutional as a valid content-neutral regulation because it furthers a substantial government interest in promoting moral norms and public order, is not related to suppressing free expression, and does not restrict First Amendment freedoms any more than necessary to promote the government's interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a government contractor have the same First Amendment protections as a government employee?", "answer": "Yes. A government contractor has the same First Amendment protections as a government employee. The political views or affiliations of a government contractor are not relevant to his work, and thus the contractor may not be retaliated against or penalized by government officials because of those political beliefs or associations."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What scrutiny must a law satisfy if it regulates the content of speech?", "answer": "If a law regulates the content of the speech (a content-based restriction), the law is presumptively unconstitutional and must satisfy strict scrutiny. This means the law must have a compelling governmental interest and use the least restrictive means to further the government's purpose. Content-neutral regulations are subject only to intermediate scrutiny, meaning the regulation has to be narrowly tailored to serve an important or substantial governmental interest and restrict First Amendment freedoms no more than is essential to further the interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What scrutiny is applied to content-based restrictions on speech in a public forum?", "answer": "Content-based restrictions on speech in a public forum are subject to strict scrutiny. The restriction must be: (1) narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest; and (2) there are no less restrictive means to accomplish the state's interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do members of the press have greater First Amendment rights than the general public?", "answer": "No. Members of the press have no greater First Amendment rights than the general public. Members of the press are not immune from generally-applicable laws even if the application of the laws has a negative incidental effect on the press's ability to gather and report the news."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a statute that prohibits all First Amendment activities in certain public places constitutional?", "answer": "No. A statute that prohibits all First Amendment activities in certain public places is facially invalid as being substantially overbroad. The law not only regulates activity that might cause congestion or disrupt regular activities, but it also reaches expression that is not disruptive. No such absolute prohibition of speech can be justified by any conceivable governmental interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What are the criteria for material to be regarded as obscene and fall outside of First and Fourteenth Amendment protections?", "answer": "To be regarded as obscene, the material must: (1) have as its dominant theme the appeal to prurient sexual interests; (2) be patently offensive to local community standards; and (3) lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific merit. Mere portrayals of nudity are insufficient to justify a finding that a magazine or film is obscene as a matter of constitutional law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can the government prohibit or punish group membership?", "answer": "No. The government may not prohibit or punish group membership unless the law meets strict scrutiny. However, the government may punish an individual for membership in an organization engaged in unlawful activity if the person is actively affiliated with the group, knows of its illegal activities, and has specific intent of furthering those illegal activities."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a state's highest court decision rests independently on both state law and federal constitutional law, can the U.S. Supreme Court properly review that decision?", "answer": "No. The U.S. Supreme Court may not properly review that decision."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a suit brought by a state resident against an instate corporation in federal district court proper and within the jurisdiction of an Article III court?", "answer": "No. The suit is improper and not within the jurisdiction of an Article III court."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts under Article III?", "answer": "Yes. Congress may restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts under Article III."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is it proper for the Senate to appoint a commission to adjudicate a boundary dispute between two states?", "answer": "No. It is improper for the Senate to appoint a commission to adjudicate a boundary dispute between two states."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the general rule for federal courts when presented with an unsettled question of state law?", "answer": "Generally, a federal court will abstain when presented with an unsettled question of state law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can states be sued in federal court contrary to the Eleventh Amendment?", "answer": "Yes, but ONLY on Fourteenth Amendment grounds."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does Congress have the power to regulate and limit the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?", "answer": "Yes. Congress has the power to regulate and limit the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Article III provides that the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction under such regulations as Congress makes."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress require the U.S. Supreme Court to directly review state court decisions?", "answer": "Yes. Congress has the power to require the U.S. Supreme Court to directly review state court decisions."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress limit all avenues for Supreme Court review of federal constitutional issues?", "answer": "No. Congress may not limit all avenues for Supreme Court review of federal constitutional issues."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does filing suits directly with the Supreme Court violate its original jurisdiction?", "answer": "Yes. Filing suits directly with the Supreme Court violates its original jurisdiction because a suit has to first be decided by a lower state or federal court."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are Article III court judges entitled to lifetime tenure?", "answer": "Yes. Article III court judges (such as district, court of appeals, and U.S. supreme court judges) are entitled to lifetime tenure."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Must a plaintiff bringing action in state trial court exhaust all state appellate remedies before seeking review in federal court?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff bringing action in state trial court must exhaust all state appellate remedies before seeking review in federal court, even when federal issues are involved."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the Eleventh Amendment generally prohibit a federal court from hearing a private party's claim against its own or another state's government?", "answer": "Yes. The Eleventh Amendment generally prohibits a federal court from hearing a private party's claim against its own or another state's government."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are the Courts or Congress empowered by the Constitution to determine the constitutionality of laws?", "answer": "The Courts, not Congress, are empowered by the Constitution to determine the constitutionality of laws."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state be sued in federal court by its own citizens without its consent?", "answer": "No. A state cannot be sued in federal court by its own citizens unless it consents due to its Eleventh Amendment immunity."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a city plans to upgrade city-owned water meters without giving notice to homeowners and without their consent, and a homeowner refuses to provide access and sues the city on due process grounds, what happens if the city then passes a new law requiring both prior notice and property-owner consent before the upgrade?", "answer": "The homeowner's case should be dismissed as moot because the matter at issue has been resolved and leaves no live dispute for a court to resolve."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A dispute arises between the President and Congress regarding the constitutionality of a congressional statute. Is this a justiciable question suitable for resolution in federal court?", "answer": "Yes. This is a justiciable question suitable for resolution in federal court because the Court may decide cases involving sensitive issues of foreign affairs when the issue is the constitutionality of a statute."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Will a federal court rule on a matter in controversy if the matter is a political question to be resolved by one or both of the other two branches of government?", "answer": "No. A federal court will not rule on a matter in controversy if the matter is a political question to be resolved by one or both of the other two branches of government. However, interbranch disputes involving foreign affairs are not subject to the political question doctrine when they concern the validity of a federal statute."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a plaintiff sues to enjoin the issuance of a contract to the prevailing bidder but fails to obtain a temporary restraining order and the contract is awarded to the prevailing bidder, what happens to the plaintiff's suit?", "answer": "The plaintiff's suit will be dismissed because it is now moot."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Must a real case or controversy exist at all stages of the proceeding for a federal court to hear it?", "answer": "Yes. A real case or controversy must exist at all stages of the proceeding, not merely when the complaint is filed. If the action complained of ceases or if effective relief is no longer available, a case may become moot because further legal proceedings would have no effect."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state court finds a law violates both the state and federal constitutions. Will the Supreme Court review the case?", "answer": "No. The Supreme Court will not review the case because even if the Supreme Court overturned the interpretation of federal law, the holding would still stand on state law grounds."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "For the Supreme Court to review a state court's decision, must there not be an independent and adequate State law ground of decision?", "answer": "Yes. For the Supreme Court to review a state court's decision, there must not be an independent and adequate State law ground of decision. If a state court decision rests on two grounds, one state law and the other federal law, if the Supreme Court's reversal of the federal law ground will not change the result in the case, the Supreme Court cannot hear it."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "In a suit for a declaratory judgment or a pre-enforcement injunction against a regulation or law, what is required for the issue to be ripe for review?", "answer": "There must be a ripe threat of injury and not just a generalized grievance based on speculative harm, or else the issue is premature and not ripe for review."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is required for a claim to be ripe for review?", "answer": "A claim is 'ripe' when the facts of the case have matured into an existing substantial controversy warranting judicial intervention. A suit is not ripe where the injury has not yet occurred, the harm is speculative in nature, or the issues for the record are not fully developed or fit for adjudication."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "An ambassador of a foreign country facing civil war sues the U.S. President to overturn the President's executive order recognizing a rebel force as the official government of the foreign country and commanding the ambassador to immediately leave the US. Will a federal court hear the ambassador's action?", "answer": "No. A federal court will dismiss the ambassador's action as a nonjusticiable political question since the court has no judicially manageable standards to apply to the President's foreign policy decisions as the President has broad foreign policy powers including his exclusive power to recognize foreign governments."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the political question doctrine, will the federal courts adjudicate allegations of constitutional violations with respect to partisan gerrymandering?", "answer": "No. Under the political question doctrine, the federal courts will not adjudicate any allegations of constitutional violations with respect to partisan gerrymandering."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the political question doctrine, will the federal courts adjudicate allegations of constitutional violations with respect to the impeachment and removal process?", "answer": "No. Under the political question doctrine, the federal courts will not adjudicate any allegations of constitutional violations with respect to the impeachment and removal process."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the political question doctrine, will the federal courts adjudicate allegations of constitutional violations with respect to the President's conduct of foreign policy?", "answer": "No. Under the political question doctrine, the federal courts will not adjudicate any allegations of constitutional violations with respect to the President's conduct of foreign policy."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If town residents sue a state agency because the agency might select the town as the future location of a toxic landfill, what happens to the suit?", "answer": "The suit will be dismissed because the case is not ripe for a decision on the merits. The town can only sue once it is certain that it will be selected."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the purpose of the ripeness doctrine?", "answer": "The ripeness doctrine is intended to prevent the courts from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements over administrative policies and to protect the agencies from judicial interference until an administrative decision has been formalized and its effects felt in a concrete way by the challenging parties."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can state courts afford greater protection than the U.S. Constitution for individual rights?", "answer": "Yes. State courts can afford greater protection than the U.S. Constitution for individual rights by establishing a higher state constitutional standard, and when a state court decision is clearly based on state law that is both adequate and independent, federal courts will not review the decision."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a lawsuit in federal court to stop a federal agency's proposed adoption of rules ripe for adjudication?", "answer": "No. A lawsuit in federal court to stop a federal agency's proposed adoption of rules is not ripe for adjudication and must be dismissed since it is not yet a case or controversy."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is required for a plaintiff to have standing to sue in federal court?", "answer": "A plaintiff must have an interest in the invalidation of a statute and must show injury in fact and causation. Mere allegations of injury or public harm are insufficient."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What happens to a federal case if the subject matter of the controversy has ceased to exist and there is no strong likelihood that it will be revived?", "answer": "The federal case will be dismissed."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What happens if a writ of certiorari to review the decision of a state Supreme Court rests on an independent and adequate state law ground?", "answer": "The writ of certiorari should be dismissed as improvidently granted because the U.S. Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review state court decisions that are based on state law grounds that are both independent of federal law and adequate to support the judgment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a retailer of contraceptives have standing to challenge a state law prohibiting minors from purchasing contraceptives?", "answer": "Yes. A retailer of contraceptives has standing to challenge a state law prohibiting minors from purchasing contraceptives."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do federal courts have jurisdiction over political questions such as foreign relations?", "answer": "No. Federal courts do not have jurisdiction over political questions such as foreign relations and such suits must be dismissed as non-justiciable."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Would a federal suit to enjoin denial of a license on the ground that the plaintiff graduated from an out-of-state school be decided on the merits?", "answer": "Yes. A federal suit to enjoin denial of the license on the ground that the plaintiff graduated from an out-of-state school would be decided on the merits because a federal question is involved."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a federal taxpayer have standing to challenge the exercise of congressional spending power that may be an undue governmental entanglement in religious affairs?", "answer": "Yes. A federal taxpayer has standing to challenge the exercise of congressional spending power that may be an undue governmental entanglement in religious affairs because the challenge is based on a claimed violation of specific constitutional limitations on the exercise of such power."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a federal statute grant a federal court the power to render an advisory opinion?", "answer": "No. A federal statute cannot grant a federal court the power to render an advisory opinion."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a business in another state that will be negatively affected by a state law that improperly burdens interstate commerce have standing to challenge the law?", "answer": "Yes. A business in another state that will be negatively affected by a state law that improperly burdens interstate commerce has standing to challenge the law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a state statute restricts public demonstrations in front of government buildings to certain times, does a person who intended to make a speech during the prohibited time have standing in federal court?", "answer": "Yes. A person who intended to make a speech during the prohibited time would have standing in federal court."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a suit by an unmarried couple on the constitutionality of marriage license requirements ripe for review if the couple has not yet tried to obtain a license?", "answer": "No. The suit is unripe and premature since the unmarried couple has not yet tried to obtain a license."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is required for standing to challenge the validity of a federal statute?", "answer": "A person must have a significant stake in the controversy and must show that he has suffered an injury in fact."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the 'Case or Controversy' limitation of Art. III, what must a plaintiff show?", "answer": "A plaintiff must show a definite and concrete personal stake in the outcome, actual injury in fact, and causation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "When a state statute is declared unconstitutional by the highest state court, what is the route of appeal?", "answer": "The route of appeal is by certiorari."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If the state's highest court's decision on state law and federal constitutional law issues are intertwined, what must the Supreme Court do?", "answer": "The Supreme Court must reverse the state court and remand to state court for further proceedings."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If the state's highest court's opinion is unclear whether the decision is based on state law or federal constitutional provisions, can the Supreme Court exercise review?", "answer": "Yes. The Supreme Court may exercise review if the state's highest court's opinion is unclear whether the decision is based on state law or federal constitutional provisions."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a medical doctor have third-party (jus tertii) standing to attack a state anti-contraceptive statute?", "answer": "No. A medical doctor does not have third-party (jus tertii) standing to attack a state anti-contraceptive statute."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a state court holds that a state law is valid under both state and federal constitutional provisions, can the Supreme Court exercise review?", "answer": "Yes. The Supreme Court may exercise review if a state court holds that a state law is valid under both state and federal constitutional provisions."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress regulate the intrastate, non-commercial cultivation, possession, and use of mushrooms for personal medical purposes on the advice of a physician in accordance with state law under the Commerce Clause?", "answer": "No. The intrastate, non-commercial cultivation, possession, and use of mushrooms for personal medical purposes on the advice of a physician in accordance with state law is not economic, and the link between the activity and any substantial effect on interstate commerce is attenuated, meaning the activity cannot be regulated under the Commerce Clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the Commerce Clause, can Congress regulate any activity that has a substantial economic effect on the stream of interstate commerce?", "answer": "Yes. Congress may regulate any activity, whether carried on in one state or many, which has a substantial economic effect on the stream of interstate commerce. However, Congress does not have the power to regulate a noncommercial activity with no link to interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state law requiring all trucks, including interstate trucks, that haul goods on the state's highways to register with and obtain a $50 permit from the state's highway department constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. The state law is constitutional because it does not discriminate against interstate commerce since it is as burdensome on local residents as it is on out-of-state commerce, and the burden is minimal compared with the state's interest in applying its police, welfare, and safety regulations."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is Congress's power over interstate commerce shared with the states?", "answer": "Yes. Congress's power over interstate commerce is shared with the states, meaning a state law may regulate local aspects of interstate commerce if it does not discriminate against out-of-state competition to benefit local economic interests and its incidental burden on interstate commerce does not outweigh the legitimate local benefits arising from the regulation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If Congress finds that when combined, wages received by dry cleaning workers have a substantial impact on the national economy and on the flow of goods and services in interstate commerce, can Congress regulate wages paid by dry cleaners even if one dry cleaning store operates solely in a locality within a state?", "answer": "Yes. Congress can regulate wages paid by dry cleaners even if one dry cleaning store operates solely in a locality within a state if Congress finds that when combined, wages received by dry cleaning workers have a substantial impact on the national economy and on the flow of goods and services in interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is required for Congressional regulation to fall within the Commerce power under the substantial effects test?", "answer": "Congressional regulation falls within the Commerce power so long as the activities being regulated have a 'substantial effect' upon interstate commerce. This test expands the commerce power because there no longer needs to be a direct effect, but only a substantial effect on interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does Congressional legislation that directs the federal courts to reopen cases on which the courts have passed final judgment unconstitutionally violate the separation of powers?", "answer": "Yes. Congressional legislation that directs the federal courts to reopen cases on which the courts have passed final judgment unconstitutionally violates the separation of powers. However, if the judgment is not final, Congress has the power to alter federal statutes and can direct federal courts to apply such new laws to all pending actions."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a defendant is found guilty of violating a federal statute, resulting in an injunction against the defendant, and the defendant appeals the decision, what happens if Congress repeals the statute with retroactive effect before the defendant's appeal is decided on?", "answer": "The district court must vacate the injunction against the defendant."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a petitioner files for bankruptcy in a federal bankruptcy court, must a state court stay any pending proceedings against the petitioner?", "answer": "Yes. A state court must stay any pending proceedings against the petitioner since, in addition to the Supremacy Clause of Article VI, Congress has the power to provide uniform rules of bankruptcy including mandating an automatic stay of all state and federal proceedings. The stay does not deprive a state court of jurisdiction over an action; it merely suspends the proceedings, which may proceed once the stay is lifted."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is it constitutional for Congress to enact a statute prohibiting discrimination in the rental of public or private residential property on the basis of sexual orientation or preference?", "answer": "Yes. It is constitutional for Congress to enact a statute prohibiting discrimination in the rental of public or private residential property on the basis of sexual orientation or preference."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8, can Congress prohibit discrimination in the rental of privately owned residential property?", "answer": "Yes. Congress can prohibit discrimination in the rental of privately owned residential property because such discrimination, when combined, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a federal statute allows a Congressional committee to overturn a federal agency's designation of certain federal lands as biodiversity sanctuaries requiring special protection, is the statute constitutional?", "answer": "No. The statute is an unconstitutional legislative veto since Congress must enact a new statute to overturn an executive agency's decision."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "When Congress delegates power to an agency through law, can it undo such delegation through law?", "answer": "Yes. When Congress delegates power to an agency through law, it can only undo such delegation through law. A legislative veto that gives one house or committee of Congress the power to invalidate or review an agency action is an unconstitutional exercise of power because Congress cannot revise the law without going through the Constitutional lawmaking procedure of bicameralism and presentment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a federal statute that requires any individual or entity owning more than 100 cars to ensure that at least 10 percent of those cars are electric-powered valid under the commerce clause?", "answer": "Yes. A federal statute that requires any individual or entity owning more than 100 cars to ensure that at least 10 percent of those cars are electric-powered is valid under the commerce clause and does not violate the Tenth Amendment because it regulates a commercial activity that, when aggregated, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress enact a statute that overrules a Supreme Court decision if the statute is intended to regulate interstate commerce?", "answer": "Yes, Congress is permitted to enact a statute that overrules a Supreme Court decision if the statute is intended to regulate interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a state vocational licensing board unfairly revokes licenses to prevent competition, may Congress enact a statute prescribing detailed procedural requirements for the disciplinary proceedings of all state vocational licensing boards?", "answer": "Yes, Congress may enact a statute prescribing detailed procedural requirements for the disciplinary proceedings of all state vocational licensing boards if a state vocational licensing board unfairly revokes licenses to prevent competition."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What power does Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment give to Congress?", "answer": "Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment gives Congress the power to enact legislation to prevent or remedy actions by state or local governments that violate provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, provided the legislation is congruent with and proportional to the Fourteenth Amendment violations it addresses."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a federal excise tax on products sold in the U.S. that is used to benefit U.S. residents constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A federal excise tax on products sold in the U.S. that is used to benefit U.S. residents is constitutional under the power of Congress to tax and spend for the general welfare."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "May a federal agency issue regulations and assess penalties for violations?", "answer": "Yes. A federal agency may issue regulations and assess penalties for violations, as Congress can grant legislative power to an agency, as long as Congress lays down an intelligible principle that the agency must conform to in the exercise of that authority."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state statute designed to prevent out-of-state takeovers that requires a majority vote of shareholders to approve an acquisition constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A state statute designed to prevent out-of-state takeovers that requires a majority vote of shareholders to approve an acquisition is constitutional because the statute imposes the same burden on both in-state and out-of-state entities wishing to acquire corporations in the state."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is state regulation of businesses permitted where there is valid justification for the regulation, and the regulation does not discriminate?", "answer": "Yes, state regulation of businesses is permitted where there is valid justification for the regulation, and the regulation does not discriminate, imposing the same burdens on local businesses as out-of-state businesses."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a federal statute that authorizes spending for the general welfare constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A federal statute that authorizes spending for the general welfare is constitutional so long as it is reasonably related to the general welfare, states concrete objectives, and provides adequate criteria for the spending."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a uniformly applied federal tax that adversely impacts some states more than others constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A uniformly applied federal tax that adversely impacts some states more than others is constitutional under the Tax and Spend Clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do members of Congress and their aides have immunity under the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution for defamatory statements made in the legislative chamber?", "answer": "Yes, members of Congress and their aides have immunity under the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution for defamatory statements made in the legislative chamber."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is a defense to a charge of contempt of Congress?", "answer": "A defense to a charge of contempt of Congress is showing that the refusal to answer Congress's questions was because they were on matters unrelated to what Congress may legislate."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "When may a federal law regulating energy prices in a state be constitutional?", "answer": "A federal law regulating energy prices in a state may be constitutional if, in inseverable aggregates, the domestic purchase or sale of such products has a substantial effect on interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "When may a federal law requiring the registration of all vehicles be constitutional?", "answer": "A federal law requiring the registration of all vehicles may be constitutional if in inseverable aggregates the thefts affect interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a federal law that penalizes the recovery of federal property on state land constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A federal law that penalizes the recovery of federal property on state land is constitutional as a necessary and proper means of protecting U.S. property."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What power does Congress have related to paying debts and providing for the common defense and general welfare of the United States?", "answer": "Congress has the power to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States and can require that the funds will be spent as directed."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress regulate the District of Columbia?", "answer": "Yes, Congress can regulate the District of Columbia and can enact legislation that applies only to the District of Columbia."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "May Congress place conditions upon the use of its spending power, even if the congressional purpose is in effect to regulate?", "answer": "Yes, Congress may place conditions upon the use of its spending power, even if the congressional purpose is in effect to regulate. Congress can use any means to seek an objective falling within the specifically-enumerated powers, as long as the means is rationally related to the objective and is not specifically forbidden by the Constitution."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "May Congress place conditions upon use of its spending power and a grant of highway funds if the state speed limit is 65?", "answer": "Yes, Congress may place conditions upon use of its spending power and a grant of highway funds if the state speed limit is 65, supported by Congress's spending power and commerce power."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "May Congress spend money in aid of the general welfare?", "answer": "Yes, Congress may spend money in aid of the general welfare, and the executive branch may not unilaterally stop the spending of appropriated monies."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a Congressional spending program for granting highways funds if the state speed limit is 65 miles per hour be supported by the spending power and commerce power?", "answer": "Yes. A Congressional spending program for granting highways funds if the state speed limit is 65 miles per hour can be supported by the spending power and commerce power."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is preventing U.S. citizens from negotiating with foreign governments over U.S. disputes justified under Congress's power?", "answer": "Yes, preventing U.S. citizens from negotiating with foreign governments over U.S. disputes is justified under Congress's power to legislate to preserve the monopoly of the national government over the conduct of United States foreign affairs."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What is the strongest constitutional basis for a federal law requiring schools receiving federal funds to regulate student aid?", "answer": "The strongest constitutional basis for a federal law requiring schools receiving federal funds to regulate student aid is the power to tax and spend for the general welfare."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a statute punishing the denial of housing, employment, or education to Black persons solely because of their race be justified under the Thirteenth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. A statute punishing the denial of housing, employment, or education to Black persons solely because of their race may be justified under the Thirteenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a statute that provides that rules promulgated under the statute may be set aside by a majority vote of a designated standing joint committee of Congress constitutional?", "answer": "No. A statute that provides that rules promulgated under the statute may be set aside by a majority vote of a designated standing joint committee of Congress is unconstitutional because it authorizes a congressional change of legal rights and obligations by means other than those specified in the Constitution for the enactment of laws."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the War Power include the power to remedy evils which have occurred due to the war's progress?", "answer": "Yes. The War Power includes the power to remedy evils which have occurred due to the war's progress, and it does not cease with cessation of hostilities."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress enact legislation involving local matters?", "answer": "Congress cannot enact legislation involving local matters unless it involves interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does Congress's power to appropriate funds include the power to require that the funds will be spent as directed?", "answer": "Yes, Congress's power to appropriate funds includes the power to require that the funds will be spent as directed."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If an appropriations statute directs $100 million dollars to be spent on highway projects, can the President spend the money on a different project or refuse to spend the funds?", "answer": "No. It is unconstitutional for the President to allocate the money to a different project or refuse to spend the funds. This would violate the separation of powers by usurping the spending power vested in Congress by the Constitution."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the Appropriations Clause of Article I, who is authorized to decide the amount and scope of federal fiscal appropriations and expenditures of tax revenues?", "answer": "Under the Appropriations Clause of Article I, Congress is constitutionally authorized to decide the amount and scope of federal fiscal appropriations and expenditures of tax revenues, meaning no money can be paid out of Treasury unless appropriated by Congress."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What obligation does the President have under the Take Care Clause?", "answer": "Under the Take Care Clause, the President has an obligation to faithfully execute the laws, meaning he may NOT refuse to spend funds whose expenditure Congress has expressly mandated."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress reserve to itself the power to remove an executive officer?", "answer": "No, Congress can never reserve to itself the power to remove an executive officer (i.e., an officer charged with the execution of the law), except by impeachment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress reserve to itself the power to remove inferior officers?", "answer": "Yes, Congress can reserve to itself the power to remove inferior officers, unless it interferes with the President's ability to execute the laws."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress reserve to the other branches the power to remove inferior officers?", "answer": "Yes, Congress can reserve to the other branches the power to remove inferior officers, but Congress can never reserve to itself the power to remove an executive officer except by impeachment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If Congress passed a statute creating a new agency to enforce federal drug laws, and the statute authorizes the President to appoint the agency's director with the advice and consent of the Senate, but prohibits the President from removing the director without the Senate's consent, does this violate the separation of powers?", "answer": "Yes. If Congress passed a statute creating a new agency to enforce federal drug laws, and the statute authorizes the President to appoint the agency's director with the advice and consent of the Senate, but prohibits the President from removing the director without the Senate's consent, this violates the separation of powers because Congress cannot play any role in the removal of executive officers."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does Congress have the power to directly appoint or remove executive officers?", "answer": "No, Congress has no power to directly appoint or remove executive officers except through impeachment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a new federal statute establishes a commission that is not under the supervision or control of any federal agency to develop regulations to protect wildlife on federal lands using specified fact-finding and adjudicatory functions, who must appoint the members?", "answer": "The members must be appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, because they are executive officers who exercise significant legal authority."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Who appoints inferior executive officers?", "answer": "All other inferior executive officers may be appointed by the President alone, the courts, or department heads."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Who appoints principal executive officers?", "answer": "The President appoints principal executive officers with the advice and consent of the Senate."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the President have direct control of the agenda of federal executive agencies?", "answer": "Yes. The President has direct control of the agenda of federal executive agencies and can withhold or reallocate funds, provided it is not inconsistent with an act of Congress."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "What authority does the President have as the chief executive officer of the U.S. government?", "answer": "The President, as the chief executive officer of the U.S. government, has authority to direct the actions of federal executive agencies, provided the President's directives are not prohibited by a federal statute."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are treaties the supreme law of the land?", "answer": "Yes, treaties are the supreme law of the land if they are self-executing, meaning the treaty becomes judicially enforceable upon ratification, but a treaty may not be inconsistent with the Constitution."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does Congress have the power to enact legislation to enforce a treaty?", "answer": "Yes, Congress has the power to enact legislation that is a necessary and proper means to enforce the treaty."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If a treaty is a valid one, are state laws that conflict with a treaty valid?", "answer": "No, if a treaty is a valid one, state laws that conflict with a treaty are invalid."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is the President empowered to make treaties with foreign nations?", "answer": "Yes. The President is empowered to make treaties with foreign nations with approval of a supermajority of the Senate."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If Congress enacts a statute that directs U.S. ambassadors to register official protests with their host countries for any human rights violations, can the President direct the ambassadors to ignore the statute?", "answer": "Yes. The President can direct the ambassadors to ignore the statute since Congress has unconstitutionally intruded on the President's exclusive power to represent the U.S. in foreign affairs."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Who has broad authority with respect to foreign affairs according to the Constitution?", "answer": "The Constitution gives the President broad authority with respect to foreign affairs, and it is the President, not Congress, who is considered responsible for conducting U.S. foreign affairs."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the President have both the power and the obligation to faithfully execute the laws?", "answer": "Yes. The President has both the power and the obligation to faithfully execute the laws. Where Congress appropriates a certain dollar amount for a certain purpose, the President must approve this and cannot cut back or refuse the appropriation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If Congress enacts a statute establishing a memorial park for a minority group victimized by a foreign country during WWII and appropriates $5 million for this park, can the President refuse to construct the park?", "answer": "No, if Congress enacts a statute establishing a memorial park and appropriates $5 million for it, the President cannot refuse to construct the park because the President has the duty under Article II to faithfully execute laws, including appropriation bills by Congress."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a law requiring the President to appoint an ambassador from a list of candidates approved by the Senate constitutional?", "answer": "No. A law requiring the President to appoint an ambassador from a list of candidates approved by the Senate is unconstitutional because it violates the President's power of appointment over high officers."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a law that provides that Senate confirmation of a Presidential appointment of an ambassador is deemed to occur automatically if the appointment is from a Senate approved list constitutional?", "answer": "No. A law that provides that Senate confirmation of a Presidential appointment of an ambassador is deemed to occur automatically if the appointment is from a Senate approved list is unconstitutional because it violates the requirement that the Senate consent to the appointment of a principal officer."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under Article II's Appointment Clause, who has the power to appoint principal officers of the U.S.?", "answer": "Under Article II's Appointment Clause, the President alone has the power to appoint principal officers of the U.S. with the advice and consent of the Senate."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is the creation of an advisory council by the President to encourage public health constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. The creation of an advisory council by the President to encourage public health is constitutional because it is within the scope of executive authority vested in the President by the Constitution, provided no federal statute prohibits it."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "How must members of federal boards exercising executive powers be appointed?", "answer": "Members of federal boards exercising executive powers must be appointed by the President or in a manner otherwise consistent with the appointments clause of Article II."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress direct the Attorney General to initiate criminal proceedings against an individual?", "answer": "No, Congress cannot direct the Attorney General to initiate criminal proceedings against an individual since law enforcement is an exclusively executive power and the Attorney General may use his discretion in deciding who to prosecute."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress make lower-level appointments itself?", "answer": "No, Congress cannot make lower-level appointments itself but can decide who can make these appointments."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under Article II, Section 2, can Congress appoint members of a body with administrative or enforcement powers?", "answer": "No, under Article II, Section 2, Congress may not appoint members of a body with administrative or enforcement powers."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does an executive agreement supersede inconsistent provisions of earlier acts of Congress?", "answer": "No. Executive agreements, though having the force of law, are subordinate to acts of Congress. Congress holds the power to make laws, and its statutes reflect the will of the people. Therefore, a conflicting executive agreement will not supersede an earlier act of Congress. The Supremacy Clause establishes that federal laws, including acts of Congress, are the supreme law of the land."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress appoint officers who exercise Executive Branch functions?", "answer": "No, Congress cannot appoint officers who exercise Executive Branch functions, but Congress can appoint members to delegate legislative powers, investigation, and the recommendation of new laws."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress infringe on the President's power as commander in chief?", "answer": "No, Congress may not infringe on the President's power as commander in chief."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress move troops?", "answer": "No, Congress cannot move troops as it would infringe on the President's power as commander in chief."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "As commander in chief, can the President deploy national guard troops to aid in relief efforts?", "answer": "Yes, as commander in chief, the President can deploy national guard troops to aid in relief efforts."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the power of the President to negotiate with foreign nations authorize the President to make executive agreements?", "answer": "Yes. The power of the President to negotiate with foreign nations impliedly authorizes the President to make executive agreements that can secure the release of a state prisoner."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "For what crimes can a President pardon people?", "answer": "A President can pardon people only for federal crimes, except for impeachment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is the President's power over foreign affairs plenary or absolute?", "answer": "No. The President's power over foreign affairs is not plenary or absolute, but the President can direct executive employees to aid in relief efforts outside the scope of their employment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do executive agreements supersede existing state law?", "answer": "Yes, executive agreements supersede existing state law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A statute is passed that appropriates funds but provides that the funds may not be expended until both houses of Congress have adopted a concurrent resolution. Is this constitutional?", "answer": "No. This is unconstitutional because Congress must abide by the presentment clause and present the subsequent resolution to the President for approval or veto."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is legislative action legitimate without bicameral approval and presentment to the President?", "answer": "No. Legislative action is not legitimate without bicameral approval and presentment to the President because Congress must follow the presentment clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A senator makes a false statement about a federal employee during a speech on the floor of the Senate. Is the senator immune from a defamation claim?", "answer": "Yes. The senator is immune from a defamation claim because the Speech and Debate clause wholly insulates all members of Congress from tort liability for statements made on the floor of Congress."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the Speech and Debate Clause immunize members of Congress from criminal and civil litigation for statements made on the House/Senate floor?", "answer": "Yes. The Speech and Debate Clause immunizes members of Congress from criminal and civil litigation for statements made on the House/Senate floor because it provides legislative immunity."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can the executive branch direct the actions of federal executive agencies if the actions are inconsistent with an act of Congress?", "answer": "No. The executive branch can direct the actions of federal executive agencies, provided the actions are not inconsistent with an act of Congress because the executive must follow congressional mandates."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a commission created by Congress to investigate vehicle safety and make recommendations constitutional if all its members were appointed by the President?", "answer": "Yes. A commission created by Congress to investigate vehicle safety and make recommendations is constitutional even if all its members were appointed by the President because it is within Congress's investigatory power."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a statute that creates a limited administrative power in the President to implement the statute constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A statute that creates a limited administrative power in the President to implement the statute is constitutional because it is within the President's executive powers."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the 12th Amendment, who chooses the president by ballot in the event of a dispute involving the electoral college?", "answer": "The House of Representatives chooses the president by ballot in the event of a dispute involving the electoral college because the 12th Amendment grants this power to the House."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does Congress's authority to investigate include areas in which the Constitution does not allow it to legislate?", "answer": "No. Congress's authority to investigate only includes those areas or matters in which the Constitution allows it to legislate because its investigatory powers are tied to its legislative powers."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can legislative power be delegated to executive officers and/or administrative agencies without intelligible standards?", "answer": "No. Legislative power can be delegated to executive officers and/or administrative agencies, provided the delegation includes intelligible standards because this ensures the delegation is constitutional."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state imposes a nondiscriminatory property use tax. Will the tax apply to federal land occupied by the National Park Service?", "answer": "No. The tax will not apply to federal land occupied by the National Park Service because it is an agency of the federal government."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state directly tax the property or activity of the federal government under the supremacy clause?", "answer": "No. Under the supremacy clause, a state cannot directly tax the property or activity of the federal government because federal activities are immune from state taxation."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is an employee of a private firm on federal land funded by the federal government exempt from state-imposed income taxes?", "answer": "No. An employee of a private firm on federal land funded by the federal government is not exempt from state-imposed income taxes because they are not a federal employee."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is the federal government exempt from state taxation if the levy falls on a private firm contracting with the federal government?", "answer": "No. The federal government is exempt from state taxation if the levy falls on the U.S. itself or on an agency/instrumentality closely connected to the federal government, but a private firm contracting with the federal government is not exempt from state-imposed taxes because the private firm is not part of the federal government."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress command a state government to pass a particular law to provide for the disposal of radioactive waste?", "answer": "No. Congress can encourage the states to provide for the disposal of radioactive waste generated within their borders, but the federal government cannot command a state government to pass a particular law because it would violate the Tenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress commandeer the state legislatures into federal service or require states to govern according to federal government instructions?", "answer": "No. Congress cannot commandeer the state legislatures into federal service or require states to govern according to federal government instructions because the Tenth Amendment prevents such federal overreach."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state levies a general tax on the gross receipts from all lottery operations within the state. Is a federal lottery outlet administered by a federal agency subject to the state tax?", "answer": "No. A federal lottery outlet administered by a federal agency within the state is not subject to the state tax because it is a federal instrumentality."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state impose a tax on a federal lottery outlet administered by a federal agency within the state?", "answer": "No. A state may not impose a tax on the federal government, its property, its agencies, or on any federal instrumentality that is so closely tied to the federal government that the two cannot realistically be viewed as separate entities because of the principle of federal immunity."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress enact a statute that requires a state legislature to enact a state law?", "answer": "No. Congress cannot enact a statute that requires a state legislature to enact a state law because the Tenth Amendment prevents Congress from requiring states to enact laws or to administer federal law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a private vendor to a federal agency obligated to pay state sales tax on items purchased in state to sell to the agency?", "answer": "Yes. A private vendor to a federal agency is obligated to pay state sales tax on items the vendor purchases in state to sell to the agency because the vendor is independent from the agency and the tax does not interfere with federal functions."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is it constitutional for Congress to enact a statute that forces or requires a state legislature to enact specified legislation?", "answer": "No. It is unconstitutional for Congress to enact a statute that forces or requires a state legislature to enact specified legislation because it violates the Tenth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a law enacted by Congress that affects state legislators be constitutional if the law does not significantly interfere with state government?", "answer": "Yes. A law enacted by Congress that affects state legislators may be constitutional if the law does not significantly interfere with state government because it respects the principles of federalism."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can federal law generally be applied to state legislators acting in the course of their official duties?", "answer": "No. Under the doctrine of federalism, federal law generally cannot be applied to state legislators acting in the course of their official duties because it would interfere with state sovereignty."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is the national regulation of predatory wild animals on federal lands constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. The national regulation of predatory wild animals on federal lands is constitutional because Congress has authority to make regulations respecting federal property."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can the federal government lease federal lands in competition with nearby local state businesses under the federal property clause?", "answer": "Yes. The federal government can lease federal lands in competition with nearby local state businesses under the federal property clause of Article V, Section 3 because it has broad authority over federal property."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a federal law that prohibits hunting on federally owned land authorized by the property clause of Article IV, Section 3?", "answer": "Yes. A federal law that prohibits hunting on federally owned land is authorized by the property clause of Article IV, Section 3 because it regulates the use of federal property."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does enacting state legislation that makes all deed restrictions unenforceable implicate a state's constitutionally guaranteed sovereign immunity?", "answer": "No. Enacting state legislation that makes all deed restrictions unenforceable does not implicate a state's constitutionally guaranteed sovereign immunity because it is a matter of state legislative authority."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does a ban on government door-to-door opinion polling violate the intergovernmental immunity of a federal employee?", "answer": "Yes. A ban on government door-to-door opinion polling violates the intergovernmental immunity of a federal employee because it interferes with federal functions."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can federal law generally be applied to state legislators acting in the course of their official duties?", "answer": "No. Federal law generally cannot be applied to state legislators acting in the course of their official duties because it would interfere with state sovereignty."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are states and municipalities allowed to interfere with federal activities or operations without Congress's consent?", "answer": "No. States and municipalities are not allowed to interfere with federal activities or operations without Congress's consent because of the supremacy of federal law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state prohibit advocating the use of force or violation of the law if the advocacy is not directed at producing imminent illegal action?", "answer": "No. A state cannot prohibit advocating the use of force or of violation of the law unless the advocacy is directed at producing or inciting imminent illegal action and where the advocacy is likely to produce such action because it would violate the First Amendment."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can state courts issue writs of habeas corpus to aid those in federal custody?", "answer": "No. State courts cannot issue writs of habeas corpus to aid those in federal custody because the Supremacy Clause prohibits states from interfering with federal detention."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state court allowed to hear a habeas corpus petition relating to someone in federal custody?", "answer": "No. A state court is not allowed to hear a habeas corpus petition relating to someone in federal custody because the general presumption of concurrent jurisdiction doesn't extend to this situation, although state courts may issue the writs to other states."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A city ordinance requires vegetables sold at farmers' markets in the city to have been grown within the city limits. Is this ordinance constitutional?", "answer": "No. This ordinance is unconstitutional because it discriminates on its face against interstate commerce, and there are nondiscriminatory ways to promote the city's interest in encouraging urban farming."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Will a state or local law that discriminates against out-of-towners be upheld if it is necessary to achieve an important government purpose?", "answer": "Yes. A state or local law that discriminates against out-of-towners will be upheld only if it is proved that the law is necessary to achieve an important government purpose because it serves a significant state interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does federal legislation preclude a state from enacting laws on the same subject that may conflict with federal law?", "answer": "Yes. Under the Supremacy Clause preemption doctrine, if the federal government through Congress enacts legislation on a subject matter seeking to fully occupy that field of law, the federal legislation is controlling over state laws and it precludes a state from enacting laws on the same subject that may conflict with the federal law because federal law is supreme."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Have federal standards of meat labeling preempted state laws?", "answer": "Yes. Federal standards of meat labeling have preempted state laws because the federal government has sought to fully occupy that field of law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Do the negative implications of the Dormant Commerce Clause apply when the state acts as a market participant?", "answer": "No. The negative implications of the Dormant Commerce Clause do not apply when the state acts as a market participant because the state is operating as if it is a private entity."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state law that requires state-run electric plants to sell only to purchasers residing in states that accept spent fuel from the plant for storage/disposal constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. This state law is constitutional because the state is not acting as a market regulator, so the market-participant exception to the dormant commerce clause applies."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state enacts a statute that imposes a fifty-cent fee on every pig raised and sold in the state to pay for a new vaccination program. Is this fee constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. The court will rule for the state since the fee applies only to intra-state activities, and it does not unduly burden interstate commerce because the dormant commerce clause does not prohibit a state regulation unless it unjustifiably discriminates against interstate commerce or its burden on interstate commerce clearly outweighs its local benefits."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can states use their police power to pass laws that discriminate against interstate commerce or unduly burden interstate commerce under the Negative Commerce Clause?", "answer": "No. States may not use their police power to pass laws that discriminate against interstate commerce or unduly burden interstate commerce under the Negative Commerce Clause because it would violate the principle of free trade between states."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A plaintiff brings a successful personal injury claim in State A under its long-arm statute against a defendant corporation headquartered in State B. Must a court in State B enforce the State A judgment?", "answer": "Yes. A court in State B must enforce the State A judgment if the defendant fully litigated the issues of jurisdiction and choice of law in State A and the plaintiff still obtained a judgment because it upholds the principles of full faith and credit."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Are issues of jurisdiction and choice of law entitled to full faith and credit if they were fully and fairly litigated in the court that rendered the original judgment?", "answer": "Yes. If the issues of jurisdiction and choice of law were fully and fairly litigated in the court that rendered the original judgment, those determinations are entitled to full faith and credit by the recognizing court because it upholds the principles of res judicata."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state awards extraction rights on a state-owned natural gas field to a local company even though it wasn't the highest bidder. Does the highest bidding out-of-state company have a dormant commerce clause claim?", "answer": "No. The highest bidding out-of-state company has no dormant commerce clause claim because the state, by acting as a market participant in selling the rights to a natural gas field that it owns, can discriminate against interstate commerce in favor of its own residents."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Does the Dormant Commerce Clause apply when a state acts as a market participant rather than a regulator?", "answer": "No. When a state acts as a market participant rather than a regulator, the Dormant Commerce Clause does not apply because the state may favor its own residents in its own dealings."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can an out-of-state customer enjoin a state on the basis of the negative implication of the commerce clause if Congress has enacted a law permitting a state to limit the sale of its natural resources to in-state customers only?", "answer": "No. An out-of-state customer cannot enjoin the state on the basis of the negative implication of the commerce clause since Congress has broad power over interstate commerce and has explicitly given consent to the state's economic discrimination."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress authorize the state to regulate even where the state law would otherwise violate the negative implications of the Dormant Commerce Clause?", "answer": "Yes. In exercising its plenary powers, Congress may authorize the state to regulate even where the state law would otherwise violate the negative implications of the Dormant Commerce Clause because Congress has broad power over interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a litigant re-litigate a case in another state to take advantage of a conflict of laws between the states if they had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the matter in one state?", "answer": "No. If a litigant had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the matter in one state, the litigant cannot re-litigate the case in another state to take advantage of a conflict of laws between the states because it would violate principles of res judicata."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state law that has a purely discriminatory effect against out-of-state manufacturers constitutional?", "answer": "No. A state law that has a purely discriminatory effect against out-of-state manufacturers is an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce because it discriminates against interstate commerce and there are less discriminatory alternatives available to protect the legitimate interests cited in the law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state discriminate or excessively burden interstate commerce under the negative commerce clause if Congress allows it?", "answer": "Yes. Although a state generally cannot discriminate or excessively burden interstate commerce under the negative commerce clause, a state may do so if Congress allows it through congressional authorization or permission because Congress has plenary power over interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a tax permissible under the Commerce Clause if it is applied to an activity with a substantial nexus with the state applying the tax, is fairly apportioned, does not discriminate against interstate commerce, and fairly relates to the services provided by the state?", "answer": "Yes. A tax is permissible under the Commerce Clause if it is applied to an activity with a substantial nexus with the state applying the tax, is fairly apportioned, does not discriminate against interstate commerce, and fairly relates to the services provided by the state because it meets the requirements for a valid state tax under the Commerce Clause."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can Congress authorize municipalities to enact legislation that burdens interstate commerce if there is a valid reason and the burden is the same on both interstate and intrastate businesses?", "answer": "Yes. Congress can authorize municipalities to enact legislation that burdens interstate commerce if there is a valid reason and the burden is the same on both interstate and intrastate businesses because it is within Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can congressional legislation prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing across the country be constitutional under the commerce clause of Article I, Section 8?", "answer": "Yes. Congressional legislation prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing across the country may be constitutional under the commerce clause of Article I, Section 8 because such discrimination, in inseverable aggregates, could reasonably be deemed to have a substantial effect on interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a judgment in a state court entitled to full faith and credit in another state if the judgment is final, on the merits, and the court had both personal and subject matter jurisdiction?", "answer": "Yes. A judgment in a state court is entitled to full faith and credit in another state if the judgment is final, on the merits, and the court had both personal and subject matter jurisdiction because it upholds the principles of full faith and credit."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state income tax that affects federal employees constitutional if the tax does not discriminate against persons who are employed by the United States?", "answer": "Yes. A state income tax that affects federal employees is constitutional so long as the tax does not discriminate against persons who are employed by the United States because it treats federal employees the same as other state residents."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state statute that only allows its residents to register commercial vehicles constitutional?", "answer": "No. A state statute that only allows its residents to register commercial vehicles is unconstitutional because it unduly burdens interstate commerce by discriminating against out-of-state competitors."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a tax on all business conducted within the state constitutional even when applied to private contractors performing work under a federal contract?", "answer": "Yes. A tax on all business conducted within the state is constitutional even when applied to private contractors performing work under a federal contract because it is nondiscriminatory."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state regulation automatically invalid if a federal statute and state statute are in actual conflict under the supremacy clause?", "answer": "Yes. Under the supremacy clause, if a federal statute and state statute are in actual conflict, the state regulation is automatically invalid because federal law is supreme."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "If the constitutionality of a state statute that requires state employees to be U.S. citizens is evaluated under the supremacy clause, which laws will be controlling?", "answer": "The treaties and immigration laws of the U.S. will be controlling because the supremacy clause ensures that federal law overrides conflicting state law."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Will a federal statute preempt a state statute if the purpose of the federal statute is different from the purpose of the state statute?", "answer": "No. A federal statute will not preempt a state statute if the purpose of the federal statute is different from the purpose of the state statute because there is no direct conflict between the two laws."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "May a state law that requires businesses in the state to purchase goods from that state be unconstitutional under the commerce clause?", "answer": "Yes. A state law that requires businesses in the state to purchase goods from that state may be unconstitutional under the commerce clause because it discriminates against interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state requirement that candidates for license must be graduates of vocational schools in that state likely constitutional?", "answer": "No. A state requirement that candidates for license must be graduates of vocational schools in that state is likely unconstitutional as an undue burden on interstate commerce because it restricts the free movement of professionals across state lines."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state statute that requires state employees to be U.S. citizens in violation of the commerce clause if the reason is to protect state jobs from foreign workers?", "answer": "Yes. A state statute that requires state employees to be U.S. citizens is in violation of the commerce clause if the reason is to protect state jobs from foreign workers because it discriminates against interstate commerce."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Can a state statute that requires all buses driving in the state to have safety devices be challenged as an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce?", "answer": "Yes. A state statute that requires all buses driving in the state to have safety devices may be challenged as an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce because it imposes requirements on interstate carriers that may not be necessary for safety."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Under the Supremacy Clause, which law controls if a valid federal law conflicts with a valid state law?", "answer": "The federal law controls because the Supremacy Clause establishes the supremacy of federal law over state law in cases of conflict."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a zoning ordinance that prohibits unrelated people from living together in the same dwelling unit valid under the state's police power?", "answer": "Yes. A zoning ordinance that prohibits unrelated people from living together in the same dwelling unit is valid under the state's police power provided the law clearly explains the reason behind this restriction, defines the terms \"unrelated\" and \"living together\", and spells out the penalties for doing so because it serves a legitimate state interest."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "A state law prevents losers of primaries from becoming write-in candidates. Is this valid?", "answer": "Yes. This is valid because it prevents chaos and confusion in the electoral process by ensuring that all candidates have a fair opportunity to secure a place on the ballot before the primary."}
{"topic": "Constitutional Law", "question": "Is a state prohibition against write-in voting constitutional if the candidates had ample opportunity to secure access to the ballot before the primary?", "answer": "Yes. A state prohibition against write-in voting is constitutional if the candidates had ample opportunity to secure access to the ballot before the primary because it ensures orderly and fair elections."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, how can an offer to buy goods be accepted?", "answer": "Under the UCC, an offer to buy goods can be accepted by any reasonable medium, including the commencement of performance. Thus, an order or offer to buy goods can be accepted by a promise to ship or by the act of shipment itself."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "How can contracts be created by the conduct of the parties?", "answer": "Contracts can be created by the conduct of the parties without spoken or written words. Conduct will create an implied-in-fact contract if both parties' conduct is intentional and each knows (or has reason to know) that the other party will interpret the conduct as an agreement to enter into a contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a party performs services at the request of another party and no price is discussed in advance, what will the court award?", "answer": "If a party performs services at the request of another party and no price is discussed in advance, the court will award the reasonable value of the services rendered. If the requesting party was aware of the price prior to entering into the contract, the contract will be based on that price."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Unless the offer specifically states otherwise, how can an offer be accepted?", "answer": "Unless the offer specifically states otherwise, an offer can be accepted by either promise or performance. In cases where the offer calls for acceptance by performance or promise, the beginning of performance counts as acceptance and an implied promise to complete performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the UCC govern any contract for the sale of goods involving one or more merchants?", "answer": "Yes. The UCC governs any contract for the sale of goods involving one or more merchants."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If the offeror dies before the offer is accepted, what happens to the offer?", "answer": "If the offeror dies before the offer is accepted, it is revoked. However, if the offer is accepted, then death does not terminate the obligations of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a unilateral contract, what happens once the offeree begins the invited performance?", "answer": "In a unilateral contract, once the offeree begins the invited performance, the offer becomes a binding option contract, which makes the offer temporarily irrevocable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a reply to an offer which purports to accept it but is conditional on the offeror's assent to terms additional to or different from those offered an acceptance?", "answer": "No. A reply to an offer which purports to accept it but is conditional on the offeror's assent to terms additional to or different from those offered is not an acceptance but a counteroffer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Before a contract is created, what must the parties have?", "answer": "Before a contract is created, the parties must have a clear understanding of the terms of the agreement and an intention to be bound."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can parties be bound contractually when they have reached an agreement in principle, even if they contemplate further negotiations or the execution of a formal written contract?", "answer": "Yes, parties can be bound contractually when they have reached an agreement in principle, even if they contemplate further negotiations or the execution of a formal written contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If an offer invites acceptance by performance, what does the offeree's beginning of performance create?", "answer": "If an offer invites acceptance by performance, the offeree's beginning of performance creates an option contract which precludes the offeror from revoking its offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a sales contract under the UCC, how can an order (offer) be accepted?", "answer": "In a sales contract under the UCC, an order (offer) can be accepted either by shipping goods (either conforming or non-conforming) or by promising to do so. However, if a seller accepts by promise and then sends non-conforming goods with a notice of accommodation, it is not appropriate and results in a breach by the seller."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a statement from a seller that he is thinking of selling an item an offer?", "answer": "No. A statement from a seller that he is thinking of selling an item is not an offer but a solicitation for an offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the mailbox rule, when is a contract formed?", "answer": "Under the mailbox rule, a contract is formed when the letter of acceptance is mailed by the offeree, and the offeror can no longer revoke his offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can an offer by a merchant to buy or sell goods in a signed writing which gives assurance that it will be held open be revoked?", "answer": "No. An offer by a merchant to buy or sell goods in a signed writing which gives assurance that it will be held open cannot be revoked by the offeror for the time stated or, if no time is stated, for a reasonable time, not to exceed three months."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a written confirmation of an offer sent within a reasonable time operate as an acceptance if it states terms additional to or different from those offered?", "answer": "Yes. A written confirmation of an offer sent within a reasonable time operates as an acceptance even though it states terms additional to or different from those offered, unless acceptance is expressly made conditional to the additions. If the additional terms are not material or objected to within a reasonable time, they will become part of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a unilateral contract, what effect does the beginning of performance by the offeree have on the offer?", "answer": "In a unilateral contract, the beginning of performance by the offeree makes the offer temporarily irrevocable. As long as the offeree continues diligently to perform, the offer remains irrevocable until he has finished."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Once an offer is accepted, what happens to the contract price?", "answer": "Once an offer is accepted, a valid contract is formed and the contract price cannot be changed by the seller."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Must revocation of a unilateral offer be done in the same manner as it was made or by a comparable medium and frequency of publicity?", "answer": "Yes. Revocation of a unilateral offer must be done in the same manner as it was made or by a comparable medium and frequency of publicity because it ensures that the offeree is properly informed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a dispute over compensation between an employer and an employee, is the contract between the parties controlling regardless of any implied-in-fact promises?", "answer": "Yes. In a dispute over compensation between an employer and an employee, the contract between the parties is controlling regardless of any implied-in-fact promises because it represents the agreed terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If the mailing of an acceptance to an offer is never delivered to the offeror, can the offeror still revoke the offer?", "answer": "Yes. If the mailing of an acceptance to an offer is never delivered to the offeror, the offeror can still revoke the offer because the acceptance was not communicated."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can an offer that is not subject to countermand still be revoked by the offeror?", "answer": "Yes. An offer that is not subject to countermand can still be revoked by the offeror because the offeror retains the power to revoke before acceptance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an offeree's power of acceptance terminated when the offeree receives from the offeror a manifestation of an intention not to enter into the proposed contract?", "answer": "Yes. An offeree's power of acceptance is terminated when the offeree receives from the offeror a manifestation of an intention not to enter into the proposed contract because it indicates the offeror's decision to withdraw the offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an offeree's power of acceptance terminated when the offeree receives from the offeror notice not to enter into the proposed contract?", "answer": "Yes. An offeree's power of acceptance is terminated when the offeree receives from the offeror notice not to enter into the proposed contract because it signifies the offeror's withdrawal of the offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an offeree's power of acceptance terminated when the offeree receives from the offeror a manifestation of an intention not to enter into the proposed contract, even if the offeror told the offeree that the offer was irrevocable?", "answer": "Yes. An offeree's power of acceptance is terminated when the offeree receives from the offeror a manifestation of an intention not to enter into the proposed contract, even if the offeror told the offeree that the offer was irrevocable because it shows the offeror's change of mind."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an offeree's power of acceptance terminated if the offeree makes a counter-offer and the offeree can no longer accept the initial offer?", "answer": "Yes. An offeree's power of acceptance is terminated if the offeree makes a counter-offer and the offeree can no longer accept the initial offer because a counter-offer is a rejection of the original offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is the offer of a prize for the completion of a task a unilateral contract that is terminable either by lapse of a reasonable amount of time or by revocation?", "answer": "Yes. The offer of a prize for the completion of a task is a unilateral contract that is terminable either by lapse of a reasonable amount of time or by revocation because it depends on performance for acceptance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a doctor and patient enter into an implied-in-fact contract when a doctor undertakes the treatment of a patient?", "answer": "Yes. Any time a doctor undertakes the treatment of a patient, the doctor and patient enter into an implied-in-fact contract because the patient expects to be cured and the doctor assumes he will be compensated."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a unilateral offer effectively accepted when a person aware of the offer performs the particular act within the scope of the offer?", "answer": "Yes. A unilateral offer is effectively accepted when a person aware of the offer performs the particular act within the scope of the offer because it constitutes acceptance by performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a unilateral offer such as a reward terminable either by lapse of a reasonable amount of time or by revocation?", "answer": "Yes. A unilateral offer such as a reward is terminable either by lapse of a reasonable amount of time or by revocation because it requires performance for acceptance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a promise binding if the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance and it does induce such action or forbearance, and injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise?", "answer": "Yes. A promise is binding if the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance and it does induce such action or forbearance, and injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise because it prevents unfair outcomes."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a promise by an obligor to perform the duty regardless of the occurrence of the event binding if the obligee has materially changed his position in reliance on it, even if the promise need not be in words and may be inferred from other conduct?", "answer": "Yes. A promise by an obligor to perform the duty regardless of the occurrence of the event is binding if the obligee has materially changed his position in reliance on it because it protects the reliance interest of the obligee."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is cashing a check that came with a settlement offer an implied agreement to a settlement, making you liable for damages if you do not perform?", "answer": "Yes. Cashing a check that came with a settlement offer is an implied agreement to a settlement because it indicates acceptance of the terms, making you liable for damages if you do not perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is the power to accept terminated if you find out that the subject matter of the contract has been sold?", "answer": "Yes. The power to accept is terminated if you find out that the subject matter of the contract has been sold because the offer cannot be accepted once the subject matter is no longer available."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an implied promise a promise that is considered to exist despite the lack of an agreement or express terms to that effect and the breach of which may be recognized as a cause of action?", "answer": "Yes. An implied promise is a promise that is considered to exist despite the lack of an agreement or express terms to that effect because the law recognizes it as a valid obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a reward offered for a particular act is effectively revoked, can a person who does the act without knowing about the reward being revoked argue that the offer was in the nature of a bounty?", "answer": "Yes. If a reward offered for a particular act is effectively revoked, a person who does the act without knowing about the reward being revoked may argue that the offer was in the nature of a bounty because the elements of contract do not apply to the offeror's liability."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a unilateral contract enforceable against the offeror by the offeree or a legal representative of the offeree once there is completion of performance?", "answer": "Yes. Once there is completion of performance in a unilateral contract, the contract is enforceable against the offeror by the offeree or a legal representative of the offeree because performance constitutes acceptance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an advertisement followed up by words of commitment become an offer, and acceptance of the terms of the offer within a reasonable time constitute a contract?", "answer": "Yes. An advertisement followed up by words of commitment becomes an offer because it demonstrates an intent to be bound, and acceptance of the terms of the offer within a reasonable time constitutes a contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a prize offer that is conspicuously displayed constitute a contractual offer which is effectively accepted when a person aware of the offer performs the particular act within the scope of the offer?", "answer": "Yes. A prize offer that is conspicuously displayed constitutes a contractual offer which is effectively accepted when a person aware of the offer performs the particular act within the scope of the offer because it satisfies the requirements of offer and acceptance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a bilateral contract, is the start of performance considered acceptance and treated as an implied contract?", "answer": "Yes. In a bilateral contract, the start of performance is considered acceptance and treated as an implied contract because it shows intent to be bound by the contract terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If acceptance of a contract is conditioned upon assent to new terms, is this a counter-offer?", "answer": "Yes. If acceptance of a contract is conditioned upon assent to new terms, this is a counter-offer because it proposes different terms than those in the original offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an offer to buy goods for prompt or current shipment normally invite acceptance either by a prompt promise to ship or prompt shipment?", "answer": "Yes. An offer to buy goods for prompt or current shipment normally invites acceptance either by a prompt promise to ship or prompt shipment because it shows readiness to contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a Seller seasonally warns the Buyer that the shipment of nonconforming goods is being offered as an accommodation, is the shipment a counter-offer and not an acceptance?", "answer": "Yes. If a Seller seasonally warns the Buyer that the shipment of nonconforming goods is being offered as an accommodation, the shipment is a counter-offer and not an acceptance because it indicates the Seller's intent to propose different terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are the terms of a lifetime employment contract unenforceable if the salary is not agreed upon?", "answer": "Yes. The terms of a lifetime employment contract are unenforceable if the salary is not agreed upon because an essential/material term has been left out of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "For there to be a valid and enforceable contract, must there be a meeting of the minds between the contracting parties on all the essential terms and conditions of the contract?", "answer": "Yes. For there to be a valid and enforceable contract, there must be a meeting of the minds between the contracting parties on all the essential terms and conditions of the contract because agreement on all material terms is necessary."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is there no enforceable contract if its terms are vague, indefinite or incomplete in respect to any material fact or condition, or as long as any essential element is left for future negotiations?", "answer": "Yes. There is no enforceable contract if its terms are vague, indefinite or incomplete in respect to any material fact or condition, or as long as any essential element is left for future negotiations because the lack of definite terms prevents the formation of a binding agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If there is a dispute over a missing term in a contract and both parties ask the court to supply the term, will the court supply a term that is reasonable under the circumstances?", "answer": "Yes. If there is a dispute over a missing term in a contract and both parties ask the court to supply the term, the court will supply a term that is reasonable under the circumstances because it ensures the contract is fair and functional."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "When parties have entered into a contract that is sufficiently defined but omits an essential term, will the court supply a term as directed by a statute or in the absence of a statutory directive, supply a term that is reasonable under the circumstances?", "answer": "Yes. When parties have entered into a contract that is sufficiently defined but omits an essential term, the court will supply a term as directed by a statute or in the absence of a statutory directive, supply a term that is reasonable under the circumstances because it ensures the contract is workable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, if the payment and delivery terms are not specified in the contract, is the place of delivery the seller's place of business and payment due upon receipt of the goods?", "answer": "Yes. Under the UCC, if the payment and delivery terms are not specified in the contract, the place of delivery is the seller's place of business and payment is due upon receipt of the goods because these are the default terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If an offeree accepts an offer at a certain quantity, is the offer considered terminated if the offeree subsequently seeks to accept the offer for additional quantities?", "answer": "Yes. If an offeree accepts an offer at a certain quantity, the offer may be considered terminated if the offeree subsequently seeks to accept the offer for additional quantities because the initial acceptance concludes the offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a written agreement to purchase land only refers to the land as \"two acres of the land,\" is a defense to specific performance of the agreement that the description of the property to be sold is too indefinite to permit the remedy of specific performance?", "answer": "Yes. If a written agreement to purchase land only refers to the land as \"two acres of the land,\" a defense to specific performance of the agreement is that the description of the property to be sold is too indefinite to permit the remedy of specific performance because the property must be clearly identified."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a promise to buy a product and pay $100 \"as soon as I am able\" create a binding contract?", "answer": "Yes, it creates a binding contract because it imposes a condition precedent that requires the buyer to pay once able to do so."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does language in a contract that imposes a condition precedent on the obligation make the contract illusory?", "answer": "No. Language in a contract that imposes a condition precedent on the obligation does not make the contract illusory because it sets a clear requirement for performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a promise illusory if by its terms the promisor reserves a choice of alternative performances?", "answer": "Yes, because it lacks a binding obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an offer that contains a reservation of the right to cancel illusory and thus no contract is formed?", "answer": "Yes. An offer that contains a reservation of the right to cancel is illusory because it does not bind the promisor to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a contract illusory if the contract does not specify the person you are buying from?", "answer": "Yes. A contract is illusory if the contract does not specify the person you are buying from because it lacks a definite promise from the seller."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A general contractor mere use of a subcontractor's bid while bidding on a prime contract. Does this constitute acceptance of the subcontractor's bid and impose an obligation upon the prime contractor to accept it?", "answer": "No. The mere use of a subcontractor's bid by a general contractor does not constitute acceptance of the subcontractor's bid because it imposes no obligation upon the prime contractor to accept the subcontractor's bid."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A potential subcontractor spends time and expense to prepare and submit a bid on the condition that it be accepted if it is the low bid, and the general contractor is awarded the prime contract. Is this sufficient consideration to create an implied contract?", "answer": "Yes. If a potential subcontractor spends time and expense to prepare and submit a bid on the condition that the bid be accepted if it is the low bid and the general contractor is awarded the prime contract, this is sufficient consideration to create an implied contract because it shows reliance and a bargained-for exchange."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a trash collector modifies a contract because of an unforeseen increase in the population of the city he services, is the second contract enforceable?", "answer": "Yes. If a trash collector modifies a contract because of an unforeseen increase in the population of the city he services, the second contract is enforceable because the modification is fair and equitable in view of unanticipated circumstances."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is the pre-existing legal duty rule inapplicable to a modification of an ongoing contract if the modification is based on unanticipated circumstances and is fair and equitable in view of the circumstances?", "answer": "Yes. The pre-existing legal duty rule is inapplicable to a modification of an ongoing contract if the modification is based on unanticipated circumstances and is fair and equitable in view of the circumstances because it allows for adjustments due to unforeseen events."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are promises to make a gift in the future usually unenforceable since there is no tangible consideration?", "answer": "Yes. Promises to make a gift in the future are usually unenforceable since there is no tangible consideration because they lack a bargained-for exchange."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a man gratuitously promises to give his friend a boat in writing and the friend writes back promising to give him a fishing pole, but the man refuses to deliver the boat when the friend visits him to deliver the fishing pole, is there an enforceable contract?", "answer": "No. There is no enforceable contract because there was no bargained-for exchange or consideration to support the man's promise as he did not seek a return promise or performance when he gratuitously promised to give his boat."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a creditor agrees to forebear on a liquidated and undisputed debt, is the agreement enforceable without additional consideration from the debtor?", "answer": "No. If a creditor agrees to forebear on a liquidated and undisputed debt, the agreement is not enforceable unless it is supported by consideration from the debtor because forbearance alone is not sufficient consideration."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is performance of a legal duty owed to a promisor which is neither doubtful nor the subject of honest dispute considered as consideration?", "answer": "No. Performance of a legal duty owed to a promisor which is neither doubtful nor the subject of honest dispute is not consideration because it does not reflect a bargained-for exchange."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the common law, are any subsequent modifications to a contract, such as agreeing to more work or to do less work, not valid unless there is consideration by the other party?", "answer": "Yes. Under the common law, any subsequent modifications to a contract, such as agreeing to more work or to do less work, are not valid unless there is consideration by the other party because consideration is required for contract modifications to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an agreement with a lender to extend the amount of time to pay the debt valid without consideration?", "answer": "No. An agreement with a lender to extend the amount of time to pay the debt is not valid without consideration because consideration is necessary for contract modifications to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a debtor's promise to pay a debt which is barred by the running of the statute of limitations enforceable despite a lack of consideration if there is part payment by the debtor or an express promise in writing, signed by the debtor?", "answer": "Yes. A debtor's promise to pay a debt which is barred by the running of the statute of limitations is enforceable despite a lack of consideration if there is part payment by the debtor or an express promise in writing, signed by the debtor because these actions revive the debt."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can there be accord and satisfaction when a debt is liquidated and undisputed?", "answer": "No. When a debt is liquidated and undisputed, there can be no accord and satisfaction because no consideration supports the obligee's acceptance of a lesser performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a conditional promise valid consideration no matter how remote the contingency, unless the condition is completely within the promisor's control?", "answer": "Yes. A conditional promise is valid consideration no matter how remote the contingency, unless the condition is completely within the promisor's control because it reflects a bargained-for exchange."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a one-sided contract where the consideration is woefully inadequate be regarded as unconscionable and not be enforced by a court?", "answer": "Yes. A one-sided contract where the consideration is woefully inadequate can be regarded as unconscionable and will not be enforced by a court because it is deemed unfair and unjust."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a written agreement to purchase an interest in property by quitclaim deed that was bargained for and supported by consideration a valid contract, even if the property has no value?", "answer": "Yes. A written agreement to purchase an interest in property by quitclaim deed that was bargained for and supported by consideration is a valid contract, even if the property has no value because consideration is present."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is consideration value paid for a promise?", "answer": "Yes. Consideration is value paid for a promise because it represents a bargained-for exchange between the parties."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is the act of saving a person's life generally not considered consideration unless there is a definite and substantial material benefit to the promisor?", "answer": "Yes. The act of saving a person's life is generally not considered consideration unless there is a definite and substantial material benefit to the promisor because it does not typically involve a bargained-for exchange."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a defense to a promise to pay the debts of another lack of consideration?", "answer": "Yes. A defense to a promise to pay the debts of another is lack of consideration because consideration is required for a promise to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a unilateral contract, is performance of a request sufficient consideration if it is a bargained-for exchange, and either a detriment to the promisee or a benefit to the promisor?", "answer": "Yes. In a unilateral contract, performance of a request is sufficient consideration if it is a bargained-for exchange, and either a detriment to the promisee or a benefit to the promisor because it constitutes acceptance of the offer."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a requirements contract, are the parties' mutual promises sufficient consideration?", "answer": "Yes. In a requirements contract, the parties' mutual promises are sufficient consideration because they create binding obligations on both parties."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the modern view, does the pre-existing duty rule apply if the duty is owed to a third person?", "answer": "No. Under the modern view, the pre-existing duty rule does not apply if the duty is owed to a third person because the performance benefits a third party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a general contractor and subcontractor sign a contract where the subcontractor will install a roof for $20,000 but the subcontractor realizes he miscalculated the square footage and should have quoted $30,000, is the contract modification to $25,000 valid if agreed upon by both parties?", "answer": "Yes. If a general contractor and subcontractor sign a contract where the subcontractor will install a roof for $20,000 but the subcontractor realizes he miscalculated the square footage and should have quoted $30,000, the contract modification to $25,000 is valid if agreed upon by both parties because the modification is fair and equitable under the circumstances."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a promise modifying a contract binding if the modification is fair and equitable in view of circumstances not anticipated by the parties?", "answer": "Yes. A promise modifying a contract is binding if the modification is fair and equitable in view of circumstances not anticipated by the parties because it allows for adjustments due to unforeseen events."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the common law, is a modification of a contract itself a contract which is unenforceable unless supported by consideration?", "answer": "Yes. Under the common law, modification of a contract is itself a contract, which is unenforceable unless supported by consideration because consideration is necessary for contract modifications to be valid."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the common law have two requirements for the modification of a contract: mutual consent and consideration?", "answer": "Yes. The common law has two requirements for the modification of a contract: mutual consent and consideration because both parties must agree to the changes and there must be something of value exchanged."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If O and A agree that O will give land to A if A agrees to give $100,000 to B when O dies, and then O transfers the land to A and tells A to split the $100,000 between B and C, is C entitled to anything if A refuses?", "answer": "No. If O and A agree that O will give land to A if A agrees to give $100,000 to B when O dies, and then O transfers the land to A and tells A to split the $100,000 between B and C, C is not entitled to anything if A refuses because A did not consent to the modification of the contract and there was no additional consideration."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In the absence of a statute requiring contract modifications to be in writing, can a written contract be modified by a subsequent oral agreement even if the contract itself prohibits subsequent oral modifications?", "answer": "Yes. A written contract can be modified by a subsequent oral agreement even if the contract itself prohibits subsequent oral modifications because the parties can agree to change the terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Once the parties agree to a modification of their contract, can either party cancel the modification with the intent of restoring the old contract without the consent of both parties?", "answer": "No. Once the parties agree to a modification of their contract, neither party may cancel the modification with the intent of restoring the old contract without the consent of both parties because mutual agreement is required for changes."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the common law, does a modification need additional consideration to be enforceable?", "answer": "Yes. Under the common law, a modification needs additional consideration to be enforceable because consideration is required for contract changes to be valid."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, are all modifications (oral or written) binding without consideration?", "answer": "Yes. Under the UCC, all modifications (oral or written) are binding without consideration because the UCC allows for flexibility in contract changes."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a party to a contract has a good faith dispute over the performance of the contract, is an oral agreement to a settlement enforceable if the disputing party pays?", "answer": "Yes. If a party to a contract has a good faith dispute over the performance of the contract, an oral agreement to a settlement is enforceable if the disputing party pays because the accord becomes effective and each party surrenders its respective claim as to how much is owed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a subsequent modification to an enforceable UCC contract valid without the acceptance of the other party?", "answer": "No. A subsequent modification to an enforceable UCC contract is not valid if it is not accepted by the other party because mutual agreement is necessary for contract changes."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, is a subsequent oral modification to a contract valid despite the lack of any consideration so long as it is done in good faith?", "answer": "Yes. Under the UCC, a subsequent oral modification to a contract is valid despite the lack of any consideration so long as it is done in good faith because the UCC permits flexible contract changes."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If the debtor in good faith reasonably disputes his liability or the amount of that liability, is a settlement by which the creditor agrees to take less than he thinks is due enforceable as an accord and satisfaction?", "answer": "Yes. If the debtor in good faith reasonably disputes his liability or the amount of that liability, a settlement by which the creditor agrees to take less than he thinks is due is enforceable as an accord and satisfaction because it resolves the dispute with mutual agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an offer to pay for certain daily activity for each day's work actually performed considered a series of daily unilateral contracts?", "answer": "Yes. An offer to pay for certain daily activity for each day's work actually performed is considered a series of daily unilateral contracts because each day's work creates a new contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a promise to pay the debt of another if the creditor promises not to file an action against the debtor a valid agreement supported by a bargained-for exchange?", "answer": "Yes. A promise to pay the debt of another if the creditor promises not to file an action against the debtor is a valid agreement supported by a bargained-for exchange because it involves consideration."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A party makes a promise not to sue in exchange for a return benefit. Later, grounds to sue arise, and the claim is either valid or the parties reasonably believe it is valid. Is this valid consideration?", "answer": "Yes. A promise not to sue made in exchange for some return benefit is valid consideration if the claim was valid, or if the claim was not valid but the parties reasonably believed the claim was valid because it involves a bargained-for exchange."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a compromise to a dispute over a debt establish an accord and satisfaction so long as both parties acted in good faith?", "answer": "Yes. A compromise to a dispute over a debt can establish an accord and satisfaction so long as both parties acted in good faith because it resolves the dispute mutually."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a compromise of an honest dispute establish an accord and satisfaction?", "answer": "Yes. A compromise of an honest dispute can establish an accord and satisfaction because it resolves the dispute mutually."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Will a subsequent contractual term added to an invoice be enforced if there has already been an offer and acceptance?", "answer": "No. A subsequent contractual term added to an invoice will not be enforced if there has already been an offer and acceptance because the contract is already formed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If you cash a check marked payment in full without objection, will you lose if you sue over the debt based on an unpaid sum owed?", "answer": "Yes. If you cash a check marked payment in full without objection, you will lose if you sue over the debt based on an unpaid sum owed because this constitutes an accord and satisfaction."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a non-UCC oral contract modification allowed as a compromise to an honest dispute?", "answer": "Yes. A non-UCC oral contract modification is allowed as a compromise to an honest dispute because it can resolve the dispute mutually."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, is a modification to a contract allowed if the written contract stipulates that modifications are not allowed?", "answer": "No. Under the UCC, a modification to a contract is not allowed if the written contract stipulates that modifications are not allowed unless the parties waive the non-waiver clause by subsequent agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If O and A agree that O will pay $2,000 to A to prepare a survey of O's land and A will use his best efforts to obtain approval of a zoning change based on the survey, is O obligated to pay $2,000 to A if A completes the survey but fails to obtain the approval?", "answer": "Yes. If O and A agree that O will pay $2,000 to A to prepare a survey of O's land and A will use his best efforts to obtain approval of a zoning change based on the survey, O is obligated to pay $2,000 to A if A completes the survey but fails to obtain the approval because A tried conscientiously but unsuccessfully to secure the approval."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a promise in a contract that is subject to some degree of discretion but not broad enough to negate commitment considered illusory?", "answer": "No. A promise in a contract that is subject to some degree of discretion but not broad enough to negate commitment is not considered illusory because the court implies a promise to use best efforts to impose a detriment on the party with the discretion and cure the lack of commitment."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a retailer enters into a distribution agreement to sell a distributor's widgets, which states that any order placed by the retailer will not be binding on the distributor unless expressly accepted by the distributor, is it a breach of contract if the distributor decides not to fill orders after filling orders for years?", "answer": "No. If a retailer enters into a distribution agreement to sell a distributor's widgets, which states that any order placed by the retailer will not be binding on the distributor unless expressly accepted by the distributor, it is not a breach of contract if the distributor decides not to fill orders after filling orders for years because the retailer's forwarding of orders to the distributor did not give rise to an obligation on the distributor's part to fill the orders."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If an agreement uses clear language indicating that the offeror's assent is expressly conditional on the offeror's agreement to the terms of the offeree's document, will the acceptance be treated as expressly conditional?", "answer": "Yes. If an agreement uses clear language indicating that the offeror's assent is expressly conditional on the offeror's agreement to the terms of the offeree's document, the acceptance will be treated as expressly conditional because it makes the offeror's agreement dependent on the offeree's terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a condition in a contract an event that must occur before performance under the contract becomes due?", "answer": "Yes. A condition in a contract is an event that must occur before performance under the contract becomes due because it determines when the contractual obligations must be fulfilled."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a condition in a contract be waived by silence or acceptance of the proffered performance?", "answer": "No. A condition in a contract may be waived, but silence or acceptance of the proffered performance is not enough to imply a waiver because waiver requires a clear and unequivocal act."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a book contract includes a condition that the author must abstain from drinking alcohol during the two months it will take to write the book, does the publisher's failure to object and acceptance of the work constitute an express waiver if the author drinks while writing?", "answer": "Yes. If a book contract includes a condition that the author must abstain from drinking alcohol during the two months it will take to write the book, the publisher's failure to object and acceptance of the work constitutes an express waiver if the author drinks while writing because the publisher's acceptance of the work without objection implies waiver of the condition."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a condition is deemed waived, can it be reinstated?", "answer": "No. If a condition is deemed waived, it cannot be reinstated because the waiver releases the other party from the obligation of that term."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract condition be premised on one party's satisfaction with the other's results?", "answer": "Yes. A contract condition can be premised on one party's satisfaction with the other's results because it sets the standard for performance based on the party's approval."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a homeowner contracts with a builder to renovate his bathroom for $50,000 \"subject to the homeowner's complete personal satisfaction,\" does the builder have a cause of action against the homeowner if the homeowner is genuinely dissatisfied with the work and pays only $40,000?", "answer": "No. If a homeowner contracts with a builder to renovate his bathroom for $50,000 \"subject to the homeowner's complete personal satisfaction,\" the builder has no cause of action against the homeowner if the homeowner is genuinely dissatisfied with the work and pays only $40,000 because the condition to the homeowner's obligation to pay was not satisfied."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is good faith dissatisfaction generally needed to declare a satisfaction clause violated?", "answer": "Yes. Good faith dissatisfaction is generally needed to declare a satisfaction clause violated because it requires an honest and reasonable expression of dissatisfaction."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a buyer have an affirmative obligation to seek mortgage financing and act in good faith if a contract of sale contains a mortgage contingency provision?", "answer": "Yes. A buyer has an affirmative obligation to seek mortgage financing and act in good faith if a contract of sale contains a mortgage contingency provision because it requires the buyer to make reasonable efforts to fulfill the condition."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a buyer agrees to buy a seller's house on an express condition that the buyer obtain a mortgage within 30 days, is the buyer in breach of contract if he fails to get a mortgage as a result of being away on a vacation?", "answer": "Yes. If a buyer agrees to buy a seller's house on an express condition that the buyer obtain a mortgage within 30 days, the buyer is in breach of contract if he fails to get a mortgage as a result of being away on a vacation because he failed to make a reasonable effort to obtain a mortgage as required by the good-faith requirement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the court imply a good faith requirement to an express condition that is under one party's control?", "answer": "Yes. The court implies a good faith requirement to an express condition that is under one party's control because it ensures that the party makes reasonable efforts to fulfill the condition."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a land purchase contract contains an express condition precedent that the buyer be able to secure a mortgage at 8% or lower interest rate, can the seller sue the buyer for breach of contract if the buyer refuses to apply for a mortgage?", "answer": "Yes. If a land purchase contract contains an express condition precedent that the buyer be able to secure a mortgage at 8% or lower interest rate, the seller can sue the buyer for breach of contract if the buyer refuses to apply for a mortgage because the buyer failed to use reasonable efforts to accomplish the express condition."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a construction contract does not provide for progress payments, must the contractor complete performance before the other party is obligated to pay?", "answer": "Yes. If a construction contract does not provide for progress payments, the contractor must complete performance before the other party is obligated to pay because payment is due only upon completion of the work."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If authorities offer a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of a felon, must they pay the reward if information leads to the arrest but they choose not to prosecute?", "answer": "Yes. If authorities offer a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of a felon, they must pay the reward if information leads to the arrest but they choose not to prosecute because the condition of conviction is excused under the doctrine of prevention."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a seller cannot cancel a real estate contract because the buyer failed to comply with the requirements of a mortgage contingency clause intended for the sole benefit of the buyer, is the seller's duty to perform still subject to the condition?", "answer": "No. If a seller cannot cancel a real estate contract because the buyer failed to comply with the requirements of a mortgage contingency clause intended for the sole benefit of the buyer, the seller's duty to perform is not subject to the condition because it was intended solely for the buyer's benefit."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If the purpose of a condition in a contract is to benefit only one of the parties, is the other party's duty to perform subject to the condition?", "answer": "No. If the purpose of a condition in a contract is to benefit only one of the parties, the other party's duty to perform is not subject to the condition because it is intended for the sole benefit of the benefiting party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a contract expressly provides that payment is not made until completion of the work, is the payor obligated to make progress payments if requested by the payee?", "answer": "No. If a contract expressly provides that payment is not made until completion of the work, the payor is not obligated to make progress payments if requested by the payee because the contract stipulates payment upon completion only."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is a condition subsequent?", "answer": "A condition subsequent is an act or event, not certain to occur, which if it occurs discharges a duty of performance which has already arisen because it terminates the contractual obligations upon its occurrence."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is a condition precedent?", "answer": "A condition precedent is a condition which is to be performed before some right dependent thereon accrues or some act dependent thereon is performed because it establishes the prerequisites for performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What must occur before an absolute duty of immediate performance arises in the other party?", "answer": "A condition precedent must occur before an absolute duty of immediate performance arises in the other party because it sets the requirements for performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is a condition precedent that must occur before a party's performance under an existing contract becomes due or is a condition to the formation of the contract itself?", "answer": "A condition precedent is a condition that must occur before a party's performance under an existing contract becomes due or is a condition to the formation of the contract itself where if the condition does not occur, the contract does not exist because it establishes the basis for contractual obligations."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the doctrine of substantial performance apply to the sale of goods?", "answer": "No. The doctrine of substantial performance does not apply to the sale of goods because it only applies to building and construction contracts."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Do requirements and output contracts contain an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing?", "answer": "Yes. Requirements and output contracts contain an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because neither party can make unreasonably disproportionate demands."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a promise not supported by consideration be enforced under the theory of promissory estoppel if it was foreseeable that the promisee would rely upon the promise to his detriment?", "answer": "Yes. Under the theory of promissory estoppel, a promise not supported by consideration can be enforced if it was foreseeable that the promisee would rely upon the promise to his detriment because the reliance makes the promise binding."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a purchase contingency designed to protect the buyer be waived by the buyer?", "answer": "Yes. A purchase contingency designed to protect the buyer can be waived by the buyer because the condition is only for the buyer's benefit."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, what can a party do when reasonable grounds for insecurity arise with respect to the performance of the other party?", "answer": "Under the UCC, when reasonable grounds for insecurity arise with respect to the performance of either party, the other party may in writing demand adequate assurance of due performance and until he receives such assurance may, if commercially reasonable, suspend any performance for which he has not already received the agreed return because it provides a means to address insecurity."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a party indicates that he is unable or unwilling to perform, does the other party have the right to suspend his own performance?", "answer": "Yes. If a party indicates that he is unable or unwilling to perform, the other party has the right to suspend his own performance because the indication of non-performance justifies the suspension."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a promisor continues his own performance after learning that a condition of duty has failed to occur, is this conduct likely to be found to operate as a waiver of that condition?", "answer": "Yes. If a promisor continues his own performance after learning that a condition of duty has failed to occur, his conduct is likely to be found to operate as a waiver of that condition because the continuation implies acceptance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are construction contracts often divisible?", "answer": "Yes. Construction contracts are often divisible because they can be divided logically into a series of separate contracts in which services are performed in stages in exchange for payments of money."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What must a contract be like to be divisible?", "answer": "To be divisible, a contract must be such that: (1) the performance of each party is divided into two or more parts under the contract; (2) the number of parts due from each party is the same; and (3) the performance of each party by one party is the agreed-upon equivalent of the corresponding part from the other party because it allows the contract to be logically divided into stages for separate performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are doubtful and indefinite statements that performance may or may not take place enough to constitute anticipatory repudiation?", "answer": "No. Doubtful and indefinite statements that performance may or may not take place are not enough to constitute anticipatory repudiation because there is no clear and unequivocal intent to not perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If S enters into a valid contract to sell his car to B with delivery and payment to be made on May 10, and B tells S on May 3 that he might not make payment by the due date, what must S do before treating the contract as repudiated?", "answer": "If S enters into a valid contract to sell his car to B with delivery and payment to be made on May 10, and B tells S on May 3 that he might not make payment by the due date, S must first demand adequate assurance before treating the contract as repudiated because B's statement is doubtful and does not constitute clear repudiation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If there are reasonable grounds to believe that the other party is unwilling or unable to perform, what can the insecure party do?", "answer": "If there are reasonable grounds to believe that the other party is unwilling or unable to perform, the insecure party may make a demand for adequate assurance of performance and if the other party doesn't respond within a reasonable time (not exceeding 30 days), it is taken as a repudiation because the demand addresses the insecurity and non-response confirms repudiation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is an anticipatory repudiation?", "answer": "An anticipatory repudiation is where a party makes it clear that before performance is due, he does not intend to perform his duties because it shows an unequivocal intent to not fulfill contractual obligations."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a buyer who accepts nonconforming goods in a single delivery contract sue for damages?", "answer": "Yes. A buyer who accepts nonconforming goods in a single delivery contract can sue for damages because the acceptance of nonconforming goods does not waive the right to compensation for losses."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a single delivery contract, if the goods fail to conform to the specifications in the contract, what options does the buyer have?", "answer": "In a single delivery contract, if the goods fail to conform to the specifications in the contract, the buyer has the right to reject all, accept all, or accept some and reject the rest because the nonconforming delivery does not meet the contractual terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a farmer contracts to provide a beer brewer with 5 crates of hops at his listed price of $1,000 per crate but mistakenly ships only 4 crates, what must the brewer do if he accepts the 4 crates?", "answer": "If a farmer contracts to provide a beer brewer with 5 crates of hops at his listed price of $1,000 per crate but mistakenly ships only 4 crates, the brewer must pay the farmer $4,000, the listed price for the 4 crates he accepted, minus his damages, if any, caused by the farmer's failure to deliver the entire order because the brewer accepted the nonconforming goods and must pay for the accepted units."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, what is a seller's nonconforming shipment in response to a buyer's order considered?", "answer": "Under the UCC, a seller's nonconforming shipment in response to a buyer's order is both an acceptance and a breach of the parties' contract because the shipment does not conform to the agreed terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What can a buyer do with a nonconforming delivery under the UCC?", "answer": "A buyer can accept or reject the nonconforming delivery in its entirety or partially accept or reject any commercial units because the delivery does not meet the contract specifications."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A milk supplier and an ice-cream company enter into a written contract for a delivery of 1000 gallons of milk every Monday for the next 50 weeks. The supplier tenders only 800 gallons on Tuesday for the 31st week. Must the company accept the 800 gallons?", "answer": "Yes. The company must accept the 800 gallons if the late delivery and shortage do not significantly impair the value of that installment or the ice-cream company's operations. The nonconformity must not be substantial."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In an installment contract, when can the buyer reject nonconforming goods?", "answer": "In an installment contract, the buyer may reject nonconforming goods if the nonconformity substantially impairs the value of that shipment to the buyer and cannot be cured because it significantly affects the buyer's benefit from the shipment."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC substantial performance rule for installment contracts, when is a buyer entitled to reject the tender of partial delivery?", "answer": "Under the UCC substantial performance rule for installment contracts, a buyer is entitled to reject the tender of partial delivery if that partial delivery constitutes a substantial impairment of that installment and it cannot be cured because the nonconformity significantly affects the buyer's benefit."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a promisee demands adequate assurance of performance from a promisor but has no reasonable grounds for insecurity, what can the promisor do?", "answer": "If a promisee demands adequate assurance of performance from a promisor but has no reasonable grounds for insecurity, the promisor may properly refuse such unjustified or excessive demands and may seek damages if the promisee unjustifiably terminates the contract because the demand was not warranted."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a delay in making the selection of goods by the buyer a material breach of the contract under the UCC if the seller has not changed its position?", "answer": "No. A delay in making the selection of goods by the buyer is not a material breach of the contract under the UCC unless the seller has changed its position based on the non-receipt of the buyer's specification because the delay does not substantially affect the seller."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, if a contract fails to provide for the type of goods to be sold and requires a selection to be made by the buyer at a later date, does a valid contract exist?", "answer": "Yes. Under the UCC, if a contract fails to provide for the type of goods to be sold and requires a selection to be made by the buyer at a later date, a valid contract exists because the essential terms like price, quantity, and time for delivery are definite."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a party to a contract asks for an extension to perform after the agreed upon contract start date and the other party refuses, is it anticipatory repudiation if the party then states he will \"try to commence the work\" on the contract start date?", "answer": "No. If a party to a contract asks for an extension to perform after the agreed upon contract start date and the other party refuses, it is not anticipatory repudiation if the party then states he will \"try to commence the work\" on the contract start date because the statement is not a positive and unconditional refusal to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a qualified or ambiguous refusal enough to constitute anticipatory repudiation?", "answer": "No. A qualified or ambiguous refusal is not enough to constitute anticipatory repudiation because it does not show a clear and unequivocal intent to not perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is an anticipatory repudiation?", "answer": "An anticipatory repudiation occurs if a party to a contract makes a positive and unconditional refusal to perform directed at the other party because it indicates a clear intent not to fulfill contractual obligations."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a party repudiates and the non-breaching party purchases a substitute, can the breaching party retract his repudiation?", "answer": "No. If a party repudiates and the non-breaching party purchases a substitute, the breaching party cannot retract his repudiation because the non-breaching party materially changed position due to the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an employment contract for \"permanent employment\" actually only a contract for employment-at-will?", "answer": "Yes. Generally, an employment contract for \"permanent employment\" is actually only a contract for employment-at-will because either party can terminate the agreement at any time without the termination being considered a breach, as long as it does not violate well-grounded public policies."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If satisfactory assurance is given in a requirements contract, is the requesting party in breach if it then refuses to perform?", "answer": "Yes. If satisfactory assurance is given in a requirements contract, the requesting party is in breach if it then refuses to perform because the assurance addresses the insecurity and obligates performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a requirements contract, what can one party do if it has reasonable grounds to worry that the other party might not perform?", "answer": "In a requirements contract, if one party has reasonable grounds to worry that the other party might not perform, it can request adequate assurances of performance because the request addresses the insecurity."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a mere request to cancel a contract constitute anticipatory breach?", "answer": "No. A mere request to cancel a contract does not constitute anticipatory breach because the repudiation must be clear and unequivocal."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a buyer reject a nonconforming installment of an installment contract if the nonconformity substantially impairs the value of that installment and it cannot be cured?", "answer": "Yes. A buyer can reject a nonconforming installment of an installment contract if the nonconformity substantially impairs the value of that installment and it cannot be cured because the nonconformity significantly affects the buyer's benefit from that installment."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a buyer who repudiates a contract retract the repudiation?", "answer": "Yes. A buyer who repudiates a contract can retract the repudiation any time before the seller materially changes his position in reliance on the repudiation because the seller's change in position solidifies the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What can a seller do if his tender or delivery is rejected because it is non-conforming and the time for performance has not yet expired?", "answer": "If a seller's tender or delivery is rejected because it is non-conforming and the time for performance has not yet expired, the seller may notify the buyer of his intention to cure and may then make a conforming delivery within the contract time because it allows the seller to correct the nonconformity."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a seller notify the buyer of his intent to cure if the time for performance has not run out or the seller has reason to believe the buyer would accept non-conforming goods?", "answer": "Yes. A seller can notify the buyer of his intent to cure if the time for performance has not run out or the seller has reason to believe the buyer would accept non-conforming goods because it provides an opportunity to correct the nonconformity."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, does a buyer in a single delivery contract have the right to reject the goods if they fail in any respect to conform to the contract?", "answer": "Yes. Under the UCC, a buyer in a single delivery contract has the right to reject the goods if they fail in any respect to conform to the contract because the goods do not meet the agreed specifications."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the American view of contracts, what happens if one party tells the other party that they cannot perform under the contract unless they pay more money?", "answer": "Under the American view of contracts, telling the other party you cannot perform under the contract unless they pay more money is a total breach of the contract because it constitutes an unjustified refusal to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the prevailing American view, what happens if one party says they cannot proceed with the work without an increase in price?", "answer": "Under the prevailing American view, saying you cannot proceed with the work without an increase in price is a total breach of contract because it indicates an unjustified refusal to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a buyer properly rejects non-conforming goods, can the buyer re-sell the goods in a private sale?", "answer": "Yes. If a buyer properly rejects non-conforming goods, the buyer can re-sell the goods in a private sale so long as the seller is given reasonable notice of the buyer's intention to re-sell because it mitigates the buyer's losses."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a delay in performance constitute a lack of substantial performance if \"time of the essence\" is not explicitly stated?", "answer": "No. A delay in performance will not constitute a lack of substantial performance if \"time of the essence\" is not explicitly stated because the presumption is that time is not \"of the essence\" in a contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is time generally considered \"of the essence\" in a contract?", "answer": "No. In a contract, the presumption is that time is not \"of the essence\" and a delay will not constitute a lack of substantial performance because language making \"time of the essence\" must be clear and unambiguous."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If one party to a contract fails to perform, but the breach is not material, and the other party mitigates his damages by obtaining a commercially reasonable substitute, can the contract be discharged?", "answer": "Yes. If one party to a contract fails to perform, but the breach is not material, and the other party mitigates his damages by obtaining a commercially reasonable substitute, the contract may be discharged because the mitigation of damages justifies the discharge of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is refusing to pay anything after proper or substantial work considered a breach of contract?", "answer": "Yes. Refusing to pay anything after proper or substantial work is a total breach of contract because it constitutes a failure to fulfill the payment obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does anticipatory repudiation by one party to a contract excuse the other party's duty to perform?", "answer": "Yes. Anticipatory repudiation by one party to a contract excuses the other party's duty to perform because it indicates a clear intent to not fulfill contractual obligations."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What does anticipatory repudiation by one party to a contract give rise to?", "answer": "Anticipatory repudiation by one party to a contract gives rise to an immediate claim for damages for breach because it excuses the other party's duty to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a failure to perform under a contract be regarded as a material breach if the breach was not willful and there is a likelihood of cure?", "answer": "No. A failure to perform under a contract may not be regarded as a material breach if the breach was not willful and there is a likelihood of cure because the possibility of remedying the breach mitigates its impact."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a seller repudiates by notifying the buyer it will not perform the contract, what options does the buyer have?", "answer": "If a seller repudiates by notifying the buyer it will not perform the contract, the buyer may cancel and bring an immediate suit for breach or give the seller a commercially reasonable time to perform because the repudiation provides grounds for immediate legal action or an opportunity to cure."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a seller delivers nonconforming goods, what must the buyer do to properly reject the goods?", "answer": "If a seller delivers nonconforming goods, the buyer must notify the seller of the breach within a reasonable time in order to properly reject the goods because timely notification is required to reject the nonconforming goods."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a party renounce a contract due to a delay in completion if both parties did not specifically manifest an understanding that time was of the essence?", "answer": "No. A party cannot renounce a contract due to a delay in completion unless both parties specifically manifested an understanding that time was of the essence because the presumption is that time is not \"of the essence\" unless clearly stated."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a party recover damages for breach of contract if the contract was contingent on a certification of satisfactory completion by the other party and the other party cannot in good faith certify the completion?", "answer": "No. A party cannot recover damages for breach of contract if the contract was contingent on a certification of satisfactory completion by the other party and the other party cannot in good faith certify the completion because the certification condition was not met."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a party to a contract have a cause of action for breach of contract if the other party fails to complete the work by the agreed upon date?", "answer": "Yes. A party to a contract has a cause of action for breach of contract if the other party fails to complete the work by the agreed upon date because the failure constitutes a breach of the agreed terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a short delay in completing work considered a material breach of contract?", "answer": "No. A short delay will not be deemed \"material\" unless the circumstances show that the delay seriously damaged the other party because not all delays are significant enough to constitute a material breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, what is the measure of damages for non-delivery or repudiation by the seller?", "answer": "Under the UCC, the measure of damages for non-delivery or repudiation by the seller is the difference between the market price at the time the buyer learned of the breach, and the contract price plus incidental and consequential damages because this measure compensates the buyer for the loss incurred."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What factors determine the materiality of a breach?", "answer": "The materiality of a breach depends on: (1) the amount of benefit the non-breaching party received; (2) the adequacy of the damages remedy; (3) the extent of part performance by the breaching party; (4) the hardship to the breaching party; (5) whether the breaching party's behavior was negligent or willful; and (6) the likelihood of the breaching party completing performance because these factors assess the significance of the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does anticipatory repudiation apply to unilateral contracts?", "answer": "No. Anticipatory repudiation only applies where there is an executory bilateral contract with executory duties on both sides because it does not apply to unilateral contracts or bilateral contracts fully performed by the non-repudiating party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a tenant refuses entry to the landlord for showings because the lease did not specifically provide for the landlord to be present at showings, does this breach the implied covenant of good faith?", "answer": "Yes. If a tenant refuses entry to the landlord for showings because the lease did not specifically provide for the landlord to be present at showings, the implied covenant of good faith would be breached because the tenant's arbitrary denial frustrates the landlord's purpose in agreeing to the lease."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is there an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in every contract?", "answer": "Yes. Both the common law and statutes imply a covenant of good faith and fair dealing into every contract because it ensures fairness in the performance and enforcement of contracts."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is there an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in leases?", "answer": "Yes. Some jurisdictions have specifically held that implicit in a lease is a covenant of good faith and fair dealing because it ensures fairness in the landlord-tenant relationship."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a condition in a contract that requires the approval of the work by a third party be excused if the third party refuses to approve the work in bad faith?", "answer": "Yes. A condition in a contract that requires the approval of the work by a third party will be excused if the third party refuses to approve the work in bad faith because bad faith refusal undermines the condition."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an at-will employment contract contain an implied term prohibiting the employer from terminating the arrangement in bad faith?", "answer": "Yes. An at-will employment contract contains an implied term prohibiting the employer from terminating the arrangement in bad faith because the implied term ensures fair treatment."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If one party fails to fix an open price term in good faith, what options does the other party have?", "answer": "If one party fails to fix an open price term in good faith, the other party may opt either (1) to treat the contract as canceled; or (2) to fix a reasonable price for the goods because it provides remedies for the bad faith action."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Must a seller or buyer who reserves the right to fix a price do so in good faith?", "answer": "Yes. A seller or buyer who reserves the right to fix a price must do so in good faith because it prevents exploitation and ensures fairness."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Do goods sold by merchants, including food, have an implied warranty of merchantability?", "answer": "Yes. Goods sold by merchants, including food, have an implied warranty of merchantability because it ensures that the goods meet certain standards of quality and fitness for their intended purpose."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If an appliance supplier sends a letter to a customer offering to sell a commercial washing machine for $5,000 and the buyer responds with a letter stating \"I accept your offer provided that you warrant the product to be merchantable,\" is this an effective acceptance?", "answer": "Yes. If an appliance supplier sends a letter to a customer offering to sell a commercial washing machine for $5,000 and the buyer responds with a letter stating \"I accept your offer provided that you warrant the product to be merchantable,\" this is an effective acceptance because it merely restates the implied warranty of merchantability in every UCC-2 contract where the seller is a merchant."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a contract requires shipment by a third party carrier but is silent as to which party pays the cost of carriage or the place of tender, what is presumed?", "answer": "If a contract requires shipment by a third party carrier but is silent as to which party pays the cost of carriage or the place of tender, a shipment contract is presumed because the risk of loss passes from the seller to the buyer when the seller duly delivers the goods to the carrier."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What happens to risk of loss in a shipment contract when the seller duly delivers the goods to a third-party carrier and a proper contract for their carriage is made?", "answer": "In a shipment contract, the risk of loss passes from the seller to the buyer when the seller duly delivers the goods to a third-party carrier and a proper contract for their carriage is made because the buyer assumes responsibility once the goods are handed over to the carrier."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a tree company cuts down trees but the logs are destroyed by a lightning strike before they can be removed, is the company entitled to restitutionary interest?", "answer": "Yes. If a tree company cuts down trees but the logs are destroyed by a lightning strike before they can be removed, the company is entitled to restitutionary interest because their performance is discharged by impracticability and they should be compensated for the reasonable value of the services rendered."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What happens once a contract is determined to be unenforceable or excused due to impracticability, impossibility, frustration of purpose, mutual mistake, duress, or minority?", "answer": "Once a contract is determined to be unenforceable or excused due to impracticability, impossibility, frustration of purpose, mutual mistake, duress, or minority, the parties are entitled to restitution damages because restitution entitles the party exercising the power of avoidance to recover any benefit conferred on the other party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can death alone discharge contractual obligations?", "answer": "No. Death alone does not discharge contractual obligations because the obligations generally survive the party's death, but one exception is a personal service contract where distinctly personal considerations are at the foundation of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can performance of a contract be discharged if a party's principal purpose is substantially frustrated by the occurrence of an event?", "answer": "Yes. Performance of a contract may be discharged if a party's principal purpose is substantially frustrated by the occurrence of an event that the parties assumed would not occur at the time they made the contract because the frustration undermines the basis of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a summer camp hires a yoga instructor for one month but the instructor is hospitalized for six days due to an illness, can the camp cancel the contract?", "answer": "Yes. If a summer camp hires a yoga instructor for one month but the instructor is hospitalized for six days due to an illness, the camp is justified in cancelling the contract because the temporary impracticability and uncertainty over the duration of the illness excuse the camp's obligation to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What can the other party do if a party is unable to perform due to a temporary impracticability such as illness?", "answer": "If a party is unable to perform due to a temporary impracticability such as illness, the other party may suspend performance of the contract and if there is a reasonable probability that substantial performance will not occur, cancel the contract because the uncertainty and potential burdens justify suspension or cancellation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the failure of a contracting party to consider a probable risk become an assumption of the risk by that party?", "answer": "Yes. The failure of a contracting party to consider a probable risk becomes an assumption of the risk by that party because they did not account for the foreseeable risk."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In the absence of explicit contractual statements otherwise, who generally assumes the risk that circumstances may arise that cause a seller's performance to become more difficult or not possible?", "answer": "In the absence of explicit contractual statements otherwise, the seller generally assumes the risk that circumstances may arise that cause a seller's performance to become more difficult or not possible because the seller is responsible for ensuring performance under the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If events render performance of a contract only temporarily impossible, what happens to the duty of performing?", "answer": "If events render performance of a contract only temporarily impossible, this will normally merely suspend the duty of performing until the impossibility ends because the obligation is paused, not terminated."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If events render performance of the contract only temporarily impossible, is performance suspended until the impossibility ends?", "answer": "Yes. If events render performance of the contract only temporarily impossible, performance is suspended until the impossibility ends unless performance would be much more burdensome, then suspension will turn into discharge because the increased burden justifies ending the obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a seller's duties be discharged if performance is impracticable due to an event such as an embargo, social upheaval, or a labor strike?", "answer": "Yes. A seller's duties can be discharged if performance is impracticable due to an event such as an embargo, social upheaval, or a labor strike because such events make performance excessively difficult or impossible."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is performance excused by objective impossibility in a personal service contract if a skilled party is unable to perform due to illness?", "answer": "Yes. Performance is excused by objective impossibility in a personal service contract if a skilled party is unable to perform due to illness because the inability to perform is beyond the party's control."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If both parties can tender performance simultaneously, must they do so concurrently absent contrary language in the contract?", "answer": "Yes. If both parties can tender performance simultaneously, they must do so concurrently absent contrary language in the contract because simultaneous performance is an implied condition of their duties."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If one party fails to perform in a contract where both parties must tender performance concurrently, is the other party excused from its duty to perform?", "answer": "Yes. If one party fails to perform in a contract where both parties must tender performance concurrently, the other party is excused from its duty to perform because the failure prevents the simultaneous exchange."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a party treat the contract as repudiated if proper assurances are not given within a reasonable time under the UCC?", "answer": "Yes. If proper assurances are not given within a reasonable time under the UCC, the party seeking assurances can treat the contract as repudiated because the failure to provide assurances indicates an intent not to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, what can a party do if reasonable grounds for insecurity arise regarding the performance of either party?", "answer": "The party may in writing demand adequate assurance of due performance and suspend their own performance until they receive such assurance. This mechanism addresses concerns about the other party's ability to perform as agreed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What conditions must be met for an accord and satisfaction to be enforceable?", "answer": "For an accord and satisfaction to be enforceable, payment must be tendered in the context of a good faith dispute as to the amount of the debt owed as \"full satisfaction\" of any claim that is unliquidated or the subject of a bona fide dispute because the good faith requirement ensures the settlement is legitimate."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is an accord and satisfaction?", "answer": "An accord and satisfaction is a binding agreement settling a reasonable, good faith dispute over the terms and/or performance of a contract because it resolves the dispute through a mutually agreed settlement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a health danger excuse nonperformance of a contract?", "answer": "Yes. A health danger can excuse nonperformance of a contract, but if it was foreseeable or self-inflicted, it will not excuse performance because the party assumed the risk of such conditions."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What must the nonbreaching party do if nonperformance is excused due to a health danger?", "answer": "The nonbreaching party must take reasonable steps to mitigate damages if nonperformance is excused due to a health danger because mitigation reduces the impact of the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Under the UCC, what are the concurrent conditions of exchange in a contract for the sale of goods?", "answer": "Under the UCC, a seller's tender of delivery of goods and a buyer's tender of payment are concurrent conditions of exchange to the extent that the performances of the parties can be tendered simultaneously because both parties are bound to tender them simultaneously unless circumstances indicate otherwise."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What happens if neither party in a UCC contract for the sale of goods is prepared to tender performance at the stipulated time?", "answer": "If neither party in a UCC contract for the sale of goods is prepared to tender performance at the stipulated time, each party's performance obligation is discharged because simultaneous tendering is a condition of performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A project manager enters into a written contract with a developer to serve \"in the essential position\" of on-site supervisor of the developer's construction project. The project manager is later injured and becomes physically incapable of performing the job as an on-site supervisor. Is the project manager in breach of contract?", "answer": "No. The project manager is not in breach of contract because the impracticability excused his performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a project manager enters into a contract to serve \"in the essential position\" of on-site supervisor and is later injured, is he in breach of contract?", "answer": "No. If a project manager enters into a contract to serve \"in the essential position\" of on-site supervisor and is later injured, he is not in breach of contract because the injury makes performance impracticable and excuses his duty to perform."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What happens if both parties to a contract understand that the existence of a particular person is necessary for the performance of a duty and that person dies or loses capacity?", "answer": "If both parties to a contract understand that the existence of a particular person is necessary for the performance of a duty and that person dies or loses capacity, the obligor's duty to render performance is discharged because the basic assumption of the contract has been undermined."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What happens to a UCC contract for the sale of goods identified at the time the contract was made if the goods are totally destroyed without the fault of either party before the risk of loss has passed to the buyer?", "answer": "If the goods are totally destroyed without the fault of either party and before the risk of loss has passed to the buyer in a UCC contract for the sale of goods identified at the time the contract was made, the contract is avoided and each party's performance is discharged because neither party is responsible for the destruction."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a requirements contract be terminated if one party in good faith no longer has any further requirements for the goods?", "answer": "Yes. A requirements contract may be terminated if one party in good faith no longer has any further requirements for the goods because the contract depends on the continued need for the goods."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can intoxication from alcohol or drugs render a contract voidable?", "answer": "Yes. Intoxication from alcohol or drugs can render a contract voidable if the person entering into the contract was unable to understand the nature of the transaction because the intoxicated party lacks the capacity to consent."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a contract voidable if one party is incapable of understanding the contract and the other party knows of this condition?", "answer": "Yes. A contract is voidable if one party is incapable of understanding the contract and the other party knows of this condition because the incapacitated party cannot give informed consent."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a contract involving a person subject to legal guardianship voidable?", "answer": "No. A contract involving a person who is subject to a legal guardianship is not voidable but is simply void because the guardianship removes the ward's legal capacity to contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract for a non-necessary item entered into by a minor be voidable due to incapacity?", "answer": "Yes. A contract for a non-necessary item entered into by a minor is voidable due to incapacity because minors lack full legal capacity to enter binding contracts."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a minor ratify a contract upon reaching the age of majority?", "answer": "Yes. A minor can ratify a contract upon reaching the age of majority and the original promise becomes enforceable to the extent ratified because the minor's ratification confirms the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are contracts of an infant voidable at the option of the infant?", "answer": "Yes. Contracts of an infant are voidable at the option of the infant because minors have the right to disaffirm contracts."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can infants void insurance contracts?", "answer": "No. Insurance contracts generally cannot be voided by infants because insurance contracts are often treated as exceptions to the general rule allowing infants to void contracts."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can an infant avoid a contract until a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority?", "answer": "Yes. An infant has the option to avoid a contract until a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority because the law grants minors the right to disaffirm contracts to protect them from their lack of capacity."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a minor affirm a contract once he turns 18?", "answer": "Yes. A minor can affirm a contract once he turns 18 and is then responsible for the amount he offered to pay because the act of affirming confirms the minor's commitment to the contract terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does undue influence make a contract voidable?", "answer": "Yes. Undue influence makes a contract voidable if the victim is coerced into signing the contract by someone taking advantage of a close or confidential relationship because the undue pressure invalidates the consent."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract be rescinded due to duress if it was made under the threat of physical or economic harm?", "answer": "Yes. A contract can be rescinded due to duress if it was made under the threat of physical or economic harm because duress undermines the voluntary nature of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What are the elements of undue influence that make a contract voidable?", "answer": "The elements of undue influence that make a contract voidable are: (1) undue susceptibility to pressure by one party; and (2) excessive pressure by the other party because these factors undermine the victim's ability to make a free decision."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract be reformed if a drafting error fails to capture the true intent of the parties?", "answer": "Yes. A contract can be reformed if a drafting error fails to capture the true intent of the parties because reformation corrects the mistake to reflect the actual agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What must a party show to obtain reformation of a contract?", "answer": "To obtain reformation of a contract, a party must show that: (1) there was an antecedent valid agreement; (2) that is incorrectly reflected in the writing; and (3) proof of these elements is established by clear and convincing evidence because reformation requires a strong basis for altering the written terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a person avoid a contract based on mutual mistake if they are considered to bear the risk of the mistake?", "answer": "No. A person who is considered to bear the risk of a mistake cannot avoid the contract based on mutual mistake because they assumed the risk of the unknown fact."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can the adversely affected party bear the risk of mistake when they contract with conscious awareness of their limited information about a fact?", "answer": "Yes. The adversely affected party can bear the risk of mistake when they contract with conscious awareness of their limited information about a fact because they chose to proceed despite their lack of knowledge."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a mutual mistake occurs and neither party has reason to know the meaning attached by the other, is there a contract?", "answer": "No. If a mutual mistake occurs and neither party has reason to know the meaning attached by the other, there is no contract because there is no mutual assent to the terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract be voidable due to mutual mistake if the mistake goes to a basic assumption of the agreement and has a material adverse effect?", "answer": "Yes. A contract can be voidable due to mutual mistake if the mistake goes to a basic assumption of the agreement and has a material adverse effect because the mistake undermines the foundation of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a contract voidable if a horse purchased for breeding purposes turns out to be sterile?", "answer": "Yes. If a horse is purchased for breeding purposes and turns out to be sterile, the contract is voidable because the mutual mistake goes to a basic assumption of the agreement and materially affects its value."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract be rescinded on equitable grounds based on a unilateral mistake?", "answer": "Yes. A contract can be rescinded on equitable grounds based on a unilateral mistake if the mistaken party can show that: (1) it was a material mistake; (2) the contract is currently unconscionable; (3) there was no violation of a positive legal duty or culpable negligence; (4) there is no prejudice to the other party; and (5) prompt notice of the error is given because these factors ensure that the mistake justifies rescission."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a buyer subjectively intends to buy a condo for $80,000 but mistakenly sends a written offer for $90,000, is there a defense of unilateral mistake?", "answer": "No. There is no defense of unilateral mistake because the mistake was neither material nor unconscionable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can S get the orally agreed price if B orally agrees to buy land at one price but the signed contract contains a lower price?", "answer": "Yes. S can get the orally agreed price if he can prove there was a mistake in integration because it falls under the Statute of Frauds and Parol Evidence."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a mistaken party rescind a contract under the modern view of unilateral mistake?", "answer": "Yes. Under the modern view, a mistaken party can rescind if: (1) the mistake goes to a basic assumption of the contract, and (2) the hardship to the mistaken party outweighs the detriment to the nonmistaken party because these conditions justify rescission."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does mutual mistake exist if both the buyer and the seller rely on an appraisal that is wrong?", "answer": "Yes. Mutual mistake exists because both parties relied on incorrect information, even if it is a mutual mistake about market value."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Will a unilateral mistake prevent the formation of a contract?", "answer": "No. As a general rule, where only one party is mistaken about facts relating to an agreement, the mistake will not prevent the formation of a contract because the mistake does not affect mutual assent."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a unilateral mistake justify rescission if the other party did not have reason to know of the mistake?", "answer": "No. A unilateral mistake does not justify rescission unless the other party had a reason to know because the mistake must have been apparent to the non-mistaken party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a buyer avoid a contract if his assent was induced by fraudulent or material misrepresentations?", "answer": "Yes. Under the common law doctrine of misrepresentation, a buyer can avoid a contract if his assent was induced by fraudulent or material misrepresentations and he was justified in relying on those misrepresentations because these misrepresentations undermine the validity of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a plaintiff prevail in an action if he tells the defendant he is looking to buy a car that has never been in an accident, but the defendant sells him a car that had a major accident and was repaired before the defendant bought it?", "answer": "Yes. The plaintiff will prevail because this is a material fact that was not revealed to the plaintiff before he bought the car."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If A makes a true statement of his financial condition to Bank B to borrow money but his financial condition becomes seriously impaired shortly thereafter, is A's nondisclosure equivalent to a misrepresentation?", "answer": "Yes. A's nondisclosure is equivalent to a misrepresentation because his financial condition seriously impaired, and this assertion is a misrepresentation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is a misrepresentation under contract law?", "answer": "A misrepresentation is an assertion that is not in accord with the facts. The nondisclosure of a fact may be equivalent to a misrepresentation when: (1) a person knows disclosure of the fact is necessary to prevent an assertion from being a misrepresentation, fraud, or material; (2) a person knows disclosure would correct a mistake of the other party with respect to a basic assumption; (3) a person knows disclosure would correct a mistake of the other party as to the contents or effect of a writing; or (4) there is a relationship of trust or confidence between the parties because these conditions make nondisclosure equivalent to misrepresentation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a defrauded party void a contract if they were induced to assent by a misrepresentation of a material term?", "answer": "Yes. A contract is voidable at the option of the defrauded party if they were induced to assent by a misrepresentation of a material term because the misrepresentation undermines the validity of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a buyer contracts to buy a house because the seller misrepresents that the house is surrounded by a national park and the well water comes from an underground spring, can the buyer prevail in an action against the seller if these claims are false?", "answer": "Yes. The buyer will prevail because the seller misrepresented facts known to be important to the buyer, and the buyer sought to void the contract soon after discovery of the deception."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What are the elements of fraud in contract law?", "answer": "The elements of fraud are: (1) a misrepresentation of a material fact occurs; (2) there is an intent to deceive; (3) the innocent party justifiably relies on the misrepresentation; and (4) the innocent party is injured. In such cases, the innocent party to a contract induced by fraud can either: (1) rescind the contract and seek restoration of his position before the contract; or (2) enforce the contract and seek damages for injuries caused by the fraud because these remedies address the harm caused by the fraud."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a party avoid a contract if they were induced to enter into it by a fraudulent or material misrepresentation?", "answer": "Yes. A party can avoid a contract if they were induced to enter into it by a fraudulent or material misrepresentation because the misrepresentation undermines the validity of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can B avoid a contract if S commits an affirmative act of misrepresentation by patching a wall without repairing the underlying termite damage and failing to reveal the damage to B?", "answer": "Yes. B can avoid the contract because S's act of misrepresentation undermines the validity of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a contract voidable at the election of B if S makes a representation that S knows is not true to induce B to assent to the contract?", "answer": "Yes. The contract is voidable at the election of B because S's misrepresentation undermines the validity of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a seller liable for failure to disclose a latent defect?", "answer": "Yes. A seller is liable for failure to disclose a latent defect because nondisclosure of material facts can be equivalent to misrepresentation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If A renovates B's house without a license, is B obligated to pay A?", "answer": "Yes. B must pay A because the license is not central to the contract and it would be inequitable for B to receive a windfall."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a contract made without a license unenforceable if the purpose of the licensing statute is to protect the public?", "answer": "Yes. A contract made without a license whose purpose is to protect the public is unenforceable because it is against public policy."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract be unenforceable based on public policy grounds if it violates a statute?", "answer": "Yes. A contract that violates a statute may be unenforceable based on public policy grounds because such violations undermine the integrity of legal standards."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a court enforce a contract that violates a statute if the violation is intended to protect the party seeking enforcement?", "answer": "Yes. A court may enforce a contract that violates a statute if the violation is intended to protect the party seeking enforcement because it avoids frustrating the purpose of the statute."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a promise to abstain from illegal activity, such as not using cocaine, in exchange for a reward enforceable?", "answer": "No. A promise to abstain from illegal activity in exchange for a reward is void because of illegality."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a service contract that is not capable of being performed within one year need to be in writing under the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. Under the Statute of Frauds, service contracts which are not capable of being performed within one year must be in writing because this requirement helps prevent fraudulent claims."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an oral agreement for employment for a term of one year within the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "No. An oral agreement for employment for a term of one year is outside the Statute of Frauds because it can be performed within one year."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a confirming memorandum valid under the UCC even if it incorrectly states or omits terms?", "answer": "Yes. A confirming memorandum is valid under the UCC even if it incorrectly states or omits terms because it satisfies the Statute of Frauds as long as it evidences a contract for the sale of goods, is signed, and specifies a quantity."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a memorandum confirming the terms of an oral agreement between merchants valid if it incorrectly states or omits terms?", "answer": "Yes. A memorandum confirming the terms of an oral agreement between merchants is valid even if it incorrectly states or omits terms because it satisfies the Statute of Frauds."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an oral contract for specially manufactured goods enforceable?", "answer": "Yes. An oral contract for specially manufactured goods is enforceable when the seller has begun substantially to perform because the goods are not suitable for sale in the ordinary course of the seller's business."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an oral promise for the sale of goods of $500 or more enforceable?", "answer": "No. A promise for the sale of goods of $500 or more is not enforceable unless evidenced by a writing signed by the party to be charged because this is required by the Statute of Frauds."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a change to any term of a contract need to be in writing if the original contract is subject to the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. If the original contract is subject to the Statute of Frauds, then a change to any term of the contract needs to be in writing because the Statute of Frauds requires modifications to be in writing to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is it a breach of contract if a supplier stops giving a promised 10% discount off its advertised price in a UCC requirements contract?", "answer": "Yes. It is a breach of contract because the supplier must honor the terms of the agreement unless a modification is made in writing."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a signed letter written after an oral promise to pay the debt of another satisfy the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. A signed letter written after the oral promise satisfies the Statute of Frauds because it provides the necessary written evidence of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an oral promise to pay the debt of another enforceable?", "answer": "No. An oral promise to pay the debt of another does not satisfy the Statute of Frauds because such agreements must be in writing to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the parol evidence rule apply if the parties to a written construction contract orally agree to the installation of 'extras'?", "answer": "No. The parol evidence rule does not apply because the agreement to install 'extras' is a subsequent modification of the original contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the Statute of Frauds apply if the parties to a written construction contract subsequently orally agree to the installation of 'extras'?", "answer": "No. The Statute of Frauds does not apply because the agreement to install 'extras' is considered a modification of the original contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a memorandum confirming the terms of an oral agreement between merchants satisfy the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. A memorandum confirming the terms of an oral agreement between merchants satisfies the Statute of Frauds unless the buyer objects within ten days of the memo because it provides written evidence of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does proof of an oral promise to guarantee a loan satisfy the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "No. Proof of an oral promise to guarantee a loan is barred by the Statute of Frauds because such promises must be in writing to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is one major exception to the Statute of Frauds for land sale contracts?", "answer": "One major exception to the Statute of Frauds for land sale contracts is the doctrine of part performance because it allows a party who has taken action in reliance on the contract to gain at least limited enforcement of it."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an oral contract for labor that is performable within one year need to be in writing?", "answer": "No. An oral contract for labor that is performable within one year does not need to be in writing because it is not within the Statute of Frauds."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an oral contract for labor that is performable within one year within the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "No. An oral contract for labor that is performable within one year is not within the Statute of Frauds because a writing is not required for such contracts."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a promise to assume the debt of another fall within the Statute of Frauds if it cannot be performed in less than one year?", "answer": "Yes. A promise to assume the debt of another falls within the Statute of Frauds if it cannot be performed in less than one year because it must be in writing to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can Bob successfully raise the Statute of Frauds as a defense if Bob orally agrees to pay the debt of Charlie in a real estate contract with Sam but it is not mentioned in the contract itself?", "answer": "Yes. Bob can successfully raise the Statute of Frauds as a defense because the agreement was to answer for the debt of another (Charlie) and was for the sale of an interest in land, which requires a written contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can Bob use the defense that Bob and Sam decided not to pay Charlie before Charlie found out about the oral agreement if Bob orally agrees to pay the debt of Charlie in a real estate contract with Sam?", "answer": "Yes. Bob can use this defense because the agreement to pay Charlie's debt was not included in the written contract itself, and Bob and Sam decided not to pay Charlie before Charlie found out about the oral agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are subsequent oral modifications valid if they are supported by consideration and do not fall under the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. Subsequent oral modifications are valid as long as they are supported by consideration and do not fall under the Statute of Frauds because a compromise of an honest dispute is considered valid consideration."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a tenant gain enforcement of an oral land sale contract if they have paid installments in reliance on it?", "answer": "Yes. A tenant can gain enforcement of an oral land sale contract if they have paid installments in reliance on it, as long as the payments are not regarded as part of the tenancy."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can any contract be modified or rescinded by oral agreement under common law?", "answer": "Yes. Under common law, any contract can be modified or rescinded by the oral agreement of the parties, even if the original contract is in writing, but consideration is needed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an oral contract for specially manufactured goods enforceable?", "answer": "Yes. An oral contract for specially manufactured goods is enforceable if the seller has made a substantial beginning in their manufacture because such goods are not suitable for sale to others in the ordinary course of the seller's business."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a written promise to pay a debt barred by the Statute of Limitations enforceable?", "answer": "Yes. A written promise to pay a debt barred by the Statute of Limitations is enforceable because it provides the necessary written evidence of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a written confirmation between merchants bind both parties under the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. A written confirmation between merchants binds both parties unless objected to within 10 days because the Statute of Frauds does not require the merchant charged to have signed the confirmation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Must modifications to contracts between merchants comply with the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. Modifications to contracts between merchants must comply with the Statute of Frauds because they need to be in writing to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a promise to pay the debt of another have to be in writing if the main purpose of the underlying contract is to benefit the guaranteeing party?", "answer": "No. If the main purpose of the underlying contract is to benefit the guaranteeing party, the promise does not have to be in writing because it is not within the Statute of Frauds."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a promise to answer for the debt of another need specific language to fall within the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. A promise to answer for the debt of another must contain language such as 'if Debtor did not pay' to be within the Statute of Frauds because it specifies the condition under which the promise applies."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Must a promise to pay a debt barred by the Statute of Limitations be in writing?", "answer": "Yes. A promise to pay a debt barred by the Statute of Limitations must be a signed writing because it provides the necessary written evidence of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a written signed promise to pay a debt that is barred by the Statute of Frauds enforceable?", "answer": "Yes. A written signed promise to pay a debt that is barred by the Statute of Frauds is legally enforceable because it provides the necessary written evidence of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are subcontractor bids usually treated as irrevocable offers until the general contractor's prime bid is awarded or rejected?", "answer": "Yes. Subcontractor bids are usually treated as irrevocable offers for a reasonable time until the general contractor's prime bid is awarded or rejected because they are considered binding under the doctrine of promissory estoppel."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a general contractor recover expectation damages if a subcontractor withdraws its bid after the general contractor's prime bid is awarded?", "answer": "Yes. The general contractor is entitled to recover expectation damages because the subcontractor's bid was treated as an irrevocable offer under the doctrine of promissory estoppel."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What must a seller do if goods in a contract are specially manufactured and the buyer repudiates?", "answer": "The seller must exercise reasonable commercial judgment and either complete the manufacture if a viable resale market exists or cease manufacture and resell the goods for scrap value because these actions allow the seller to recover the difference between the contract price of the goods and their resale price or sue for the full contract price if resale is impracticable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an employee have to take a different job to mitigate damages if an employer breaches an employment contract?", "answer": "No. The employee is not required to take a different job to mitigate damages because the job must be substantially similar in terms of location, type of service, hours of work, and status."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If an employer breaches an employment contract, does the employee have a duty to mitigate damages?", "answer": "Yes. The employee has a duty to mitigate damages by making a reasonable effort to find comparable employment but is not required to take other employment that is inferior or different because the employee's duty is to minimize damages without compromising on job quality."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can attorney's fees be recovered if provided for in the contract or by statute?", "answer": "Yes. Attorney's fees can be recovered if provided for in the contract or by statute because these provisions explicitly allow for the recovery of such fees."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Do attorney's fees qualify as a recoverable incidental or consequential loss?", "answer": "No. Attorney's fees generally do not qualify as a recoverable incidental or consequential loss unless provided for in the contract or by statute because they are not typically considered damages arising from a breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a buyer recover damages if a seller delivers an antique chair worth $9,000 damaged and fails to pay for the $2,000 repair cost, resulting in the chair being worth only $6,000?", "answer": "Yes. The buyer can recover $5,000 in damages because the measure of damage is the chair's value as warranted ($9,000), minus its value as repaired ($6,000), plus the repair costs ($2,000)."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the measure of damages for breach of warranty under the UCC?", "answer": "The measure of damages for breach of warranty under the UCC is the difference at the time and place of acceptance between the value of the goods accepted and the value they would have had if they had been as warranted unless special circumstances show proximate damages of a different amount because this calculation reflects the loss resulting from the seller's breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a non-breaching party entitled to recover damages that were foreseeable as a probable result of the breach?", "answer": "Yes. A non-breaching party is entitled to recover damages that the party in breach had reason to foresee as a probable result of the breach when the parties entered into the contract because foreseeability determines the scope of recoverable damages."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a borrower entitled to recover lost profits for breach of a contract to lend money?", "answer": "No. A borrower cannot recover lost profits for breach of a contract to lend money because they are considered unforeseeable at the time of contract formation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the proper measure of damages for breach of a contract to lend money?", "answer": "The proper measure of damages for breach of a contract to lend money is the additional cost of obtaining a loan from another lender because this measure reflects the direct financial impact of the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the measure of damages for a lost volume seller if a buyer wrongfully rejects a good?", "answer": "The measure of damages for a lost volume seller if a buyer wrongfully rejects a good is the profit the manufacturer would have made on the sale of the item to the buyer because this reflects the lost opportunity to sell the goods."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a buyer liable to the seller for the fair market value of goods at the time of conversion if the buyer exercises ownership over the goods by selling them to a third party after rightfully rejecting them?", "answer": "Yes. The buyer is liable to the seller for the fair market value of the goods at the time of conversion because the buyer has wrongfully converted the goods."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contractor recover damages if a homeowner breaches after the contractor spent $45,000 on labor and materials but can use $5,000 of the materials on another job?", "answer": "Yes. The contractor is entitled to damages of $50,000 because the contractor's damages include the profit expected ($10,000) plus the amount spent ($45,000) minus the amount used on another job ($5,000)."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a non-breaching party entitled to be put in the position as if the contract had been performed upon a breach?", "answer": "Yes. Upon a breach, the non-breaching party should be put in the position as if the contract had been performed, plus reasonable expenses for mitigating after the breach because this ensures the non-breaching party is made whole."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a nonbreaching party entitled to receive the contract price for work done and any foreseeable damages if a price for the services was stated in the contract?", "answer": "Yes. The nonbreaching party is entitled to receive the contract price for work done and any foreseeable damages because the contract governs the compensation for the services provided."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can the seller recover the profit and costs incurred minus the proceeds from the resale if a purchaser repudiates a UCC contract?", "answer": "Yes. If a purchaser repudiates a UCC contract, the seller is entitled to the profit the seller would have made, plus allowance for costs reasonably incurred, minus the proceeds received from the resale of the goods because these elements reflect the seller's loss due to the repudiation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a contract for the construction of 3 different houses on 3 different lots for 3 different prices divisible?", "answer": "Yes. A contract for the construction of 3 different houses on 3 different lots for 3 different prices is divisible because each house is treated as a separate contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the measure of damages recoverable by a lost volume seller for a buyer's breach?", "answer": "The measure of damages recoverable by a lost volume seller for a buyer's breach is the profit the seller would have made on the sale plus any incidental damages because this reflects the lost opportunity to sell the goods."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contractor recover from the landlord based on quasi contract if the tenant does not pay and the landlord is unjustly enriched by services performed?", "answer": "Yes. A contractor can recover from the landlord based on quasi contract if the tenant does not pay because the landlord's unjust enrichment by the services performed creates a quasi-contractual obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does the non-breaching party have a right to damages based on his expectation interest?", "answer": "Yes. The non-breaching party has a right to damages based on his expectation interest because this is measured by the loss in the value of the other party's performance caused by its failure or deficiency."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What are the seller's damages if a buyer repudiates a contract?", "answer": "If a buyer repudiates a contract, the seller's damages are the contract price minus their cost because this represents their lost profit."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the measure of damages if a contractor is in breach of contract?", "answer": "If a contractor is in breach of contract, the measure of damages is the cost to get the house completed by another contractor minus installments not yet paid to the first contractor because this reflects the homeowner's cost to complete the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "When does the risk of loss pass to the buyer in a contract specifying 'F.O.B. Seller's place of business'?", "answer": "In a contract specifying 'F.O.B. Seller's place of business,' the risk of loss passes to the buyer when the goods are delivered to the shipper because this fulfills the seller's delivery obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the non-breaching party's recovery in a breach of contract action?", "answer": "In a breach of contract action, the non-breaching party will recover the difference between the original contract price and the cover contract price because this represents the additional cost incurred due to the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the remedy to a buyer of nonconforming goods?", "answer": "The remedy to a buyer of nonconforming goods is the difference between the contract price and the cost of buying substitute goods because this compensates the buyer for the nonconformity."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a party in breach of contract recover the reasonable value of its services if the other party derives a benefit and knew payment was expected?", "answer": "Yes. A party in breach of contract can recover the reasonable value of its services if the other party derives a benefit and knew that payment was expected because the benefit conferred creates a quasi-contractual obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can you recover the reasonable value of improvements made to land if the contract to purchase the land is invalid?", "answer": "Yes. If you improve land expecting to purchase it, but the contract is invalid, you can recover the reasonable value of the improvements because benefits were unofficiously and non-gratuitously conferred to the other party under the theory of quasi-contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a provision in a sales agreement requiring a pre-inspection payment impair a buyer's right of inspection or legal remedies?", "answer": "No. A provision in a sales agreement requiring a pre-inspection payment does not impair a buyer's right of inspection or legal remedies because these rights remain intact regardless of the payment provision."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "When does the risk of loss pass to the buyer for non-merchants?", "answer": "For non-merchants, the risk of loss does not pass to the buyer until tender of the goods because the buyer must be given an opportunity to take possession before assuming the risk."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a party to a contract entitled to be paid for his work before completing performance if the contract says nothing about progress payments?", "answer": "No. Unless a contract contains language about progress payments, a party to a contract is not entitled to be paid for his work until he completely performs because the obligation to pay is conditioned on complete performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are consequential damages recoverable in contract disputes?", "answer": "No. Consequential damages are generally not recoverable in contract disputes unless they were reasonably foreseeable to the breaching party at the time of the contract because foreseeability determines the scope of recoverable consequential damages."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a non-breaching party recover incidental damages in contract disputes?", "answer": "Yes. A non-breaching party may always recover incidental damages because these costs are incurred in dealing with the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a breaching party liable for consequential damages if both parties knew at contract formation that the non-breaching party would sustain little or no damages due to a minor delay?", "answer": "No. The breaching party is not liable for consequential damages if both parties knew at contract formation that the non-breaching party would sustain little or no damages due to a minor delay because the damages were not foreseeable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a nonbreaching party entitled to consequential damages if he fails to mitigate?", "answer": "No. A nonbreaching party who fails to mitigate is only entitled to damages to put him in the position he would have been in had the contract been performed because he is not entitled to consequential damages if he fails to mitigate."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are consequential damages only recoverable if they were reasonably foreseeable by the breaching party or within the contemplation of the parties at the time of the contract?", "answer": "Yes. Consequential damages are only recoverable if it is determined the damages were reasonably foreseeable by the breaching party or within the contemplation of the parties at the time of the contract because foreseeability limits the scope of recoverable consequential damages."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a party recover consequential damages if the damages were foreseeable by any reasonable person, regardless of whether the defendant actually foresaw them?", "answer": "Yes. A party to a contract can recover consequential damages if the damages were foreseeable by any reasonable person because foreseeability does not require actual foresight by the defendant."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can damages for personal injuries be recovered in a contract action if the loss was foreseeable?", "answer": "Yes. Damages for personal injuries can be recovered in a contract action if such a loss was foreseeable because foreseeability extends to all types of losses caused by the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a seller keep a deposit if a purchaser defaults and the contract includes a liquidated damages provision?", "answer": "Yes. If there is a provision in a real estate contract for liquidated damages and the purchaser defaults, the seller can keep the deposit if it reflects the seller's damages because the liquidated damages provision sets the agreed amount of compensation for the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a plaintiff recover actual damages if a liquidated damages clause is deemed punitive?", "answer": "Yes. If a party breaches but actual damages are minimal, a liquidated damages clause may be deemed punitive, and a plaintiff will only recover actual damages because courts do not enforce punitive liquidated damages."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is a penalty or forfeiture clause in a contract?", "answer": "A penalty or forfeiture clause is a sum in excess of the value of the contract and fixed to be paid on breach of the contract because it serves as a deterrent rather than a compensation for the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a liquidated damages clause equal to 50% of the contract price considered a penalty?", "answer": "Yes. A liquidated damages clause equal to 50% of the contract price is a penalty making the contract invalid and unenforceable because it imposes an excessive burden not reflective of actual damages."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A buyer agrees to purchase lumber from a seller for $15,000 with delivery to be made on June 1. The price of lumber increases substantially on May 15, and the seller tells the buyer it won't deliver the lumber unless the buyer agrees to pay $20,000 and waive any claim for damages against the seller. Is this a repudiation?", "answer": "Yes. This is a repudiation because the seller is demanding a modification of the contract terms and refusing to perform the original agreement unless the modification is accepted."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a demand for modification constitute repudiation under the UCC?", "answer": "No. A demand for modification is not itself a repudiation, but if the party wrongfully states that it will not perform unless the other party consents to a modification, that statement amounts to repudiation because it signals an unwillingness to fulfill contractual obligations."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a nonbreaching party recover expectation damages?", "answer": "Yes. A nonbreaching party can recover expectation damages if they occur naturally, or are consequences that were contemplated by the parties because expectation damages aim to place the injured party in the position he would have been in had the contract been fully performed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A programmer sells his internet company to a multinational corporation for $10 million under a contract that also promises to hire the programmer for three years at a salary of $1 million per year. The corporation fires the programmer without cause after one year. Can the programmer recover the promised salary for the remaining two years if a comparable job is not reasonably available?", "answer": "Yes. The programmer can recover the promised salary for the remaining two years because he is not required to take another job that is not substantially similar in regards to location, type of service, hours of work, and status."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an employee have a duty to mitigate damages if an employer breaches an employment contract?", "answer": "Yes. An employee has a duty to mitigate damages by making a reasonable effort to find comparable employment because this reduces the overall loss sustained due to the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "An experienced attorney contracts with a law firm at a salary of $5 million to lead the firm's insurance department as a managing partner. The firm notifies the attorney that it will instead offer him a position as a senior associate at another department at a salary of $2 million. The attorney declines another firm's offer of $4 million to head its insurance department to pursue an LLM. How much can the attorney recover?", "answer": "The attorney can recover only $1 million because a party in an employment contract recovers his expectation damages, minus any amount of loss that could have been avoided with reasonable efforts at obtaining a comparable position."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What happens if an employee refuses to mitigate damages by finding comparable employment after an employer breaches an employment contract?", "answer": "If an employee fails or refuses to mitigate damages by finding comparable employment, the employee's recovery is reduced by the amount of the loss that could have been avoided because failure to mitigate limits the damages recoverable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Both parties to a contract intended to include a provision in the contract but through a mutual mistake they forget to include it in the written contract. Can the court modify the contract to include the provision?", "answer": "Yes. The court will modify the contract to express that agreement because reformation corrects the mutual mistake and ensures the contract reflects the parties' original intention."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is reformation of a contract?", "answer": "Reformation is a court order effectively rewriting contract documents to correct mistakes because it ensures the written contract accurately reflects the parties' original agreement."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract be reformed if the mistake is unilateral but induced by fraudulent conduct?", "answer": "Yes. A contract can be reformed to the original contract if the mistake is unilateral but induced by fraudulent, unfair, or inequitable conduct because the reformation corrects the fraud-induced error."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract be rescinded due to knowledge of a debt not owed?", "answer": "Yes. A contract can be rescinded if one party knows the debt is not owed because the other party's lack of knowledge creates a basis for rescission."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What are the damages for a seller's breach of a real estate sale contract if specific performance is not available?", "answer": "If specific performance is not available, the measure of damages for a seller's breach of a real estate sale contract is the difference between the sales price and the fair market value of the property on the date of the breach because this reflects the buyer's loss due to the breach."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Will a court grant specific performance in a land-sale contract where the seller has not yet conveyed and the buyer breaches the contract?", "answer": "Yes. In a land-sale contract where the seller has not yet conveyed and the buyer breaches the contract, a court will grant specific performance because the remedy ensures the seller receives the agreed-upon consideration."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can you compel performance in a personal service contract if the services are unique?", "answer": "No. In a personal service contract, you cannot compel the person to perform, even if the services are unique because personal service contracts require voluntary cooperation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A contractor wrongfully abandons work after erecting part of a building. The market value of the work done before abandonment is $5,000, but the amount of the contract price attributable to that work is only $4,000. How much can the contractor recover?", "answer": "The contractor cannot recover more than $4,000 because restitutionary recovery is limited to the smaller of the market value of what was done or the portion of the price allocated to the performance under the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a breacher recover under the contract after partially performing?", "answer": "No. When a party materially breaches a contract after having partially performed, the breacher cannot recover under the contract but can obtain restitution for the value of the benefit conferred because the breacher is at fault for breaking the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are reliance damages recoverable if negotiations fail without an enforceable contractual obligation?", "answer": "No. Reliance damages are not recoverable if negotiations fail and there are no enforceable contractual obligations unless one party conferred a benefit on the other because parties are free to negotiate without risk of liability."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a nonbreaching party have a right to damages based on his expectation interest?", "answer": "Yes. A nonbreaching party has a right to damages based on his expectation interest because this measure aims to put the injured party in the position he would have been in had the contract been performed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What must a seller do if a buyer rightfully rejects delivery or justifiably revokes acceptance under the UCC?", "answer": "If a buyer rightfully rejects delivery or justifiably revokes acceptance under the UCC, the seller must pay restitution by returning any down payment received because the law of restitution seeks to restore the benefit conferred to the breaching party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a buyer resell nonconforming goods if the seller refuses to restore or repay?", "answer": "Yes. If a buyer pays for nonconforming goods and the seller refuses to restore the goods or repay the buyer, the buyer can resell the goods at public or private sale to credit the amount owed by the seller to the buyer because this mitigates the buyer's loss."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Do courts deny restitution to a party that has willfully breached?", "answer": "Yes. Many courts deny restitution to a party that has willfully breached because the breaching party should not benefit from its own wrongdoing."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is restitution an elective remedy to repudiation in all jurisdictions?", "answer": "Yes. All jurisdictions recognize restitution as an elective remedy to repudiation because it allows the non-breaching party to recover benefits conferred on the breaching party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a breaching party seek restitution damages after partial performance?", "answer": "Yes. If a party wrongfully breaches after partial performance, the breaching party can still seek restitution damages in quantum meruit because restitution compensates for the value of the benefit conferred, minus the non-breaching party's damages."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a party wrongfully breaches after partial performance, can the breaching party seek restitution damages?", "answer": "Yes. The breaching party can seek restitution damages in quantum meruit because restitution compensates for the value of the benefit conferred, minus the non-breaching party's damages."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is course-of-dealing evidence admissible to explain or supplement a final written agreement under the UCC?", "answer": "Yes. Under the UCC's parol evidence rule, course-of-dealing evidence is admissible to explain or supplement a final written agreement because it reflects the parties' prior conduct and helps clarify the terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "In a conflict over the terms of a contract, which trumps: express terms, course of dealing, or usage of trade?", "answer": "Express terms trump course of dealing and usage of trade, and course of dealing trumps usage of trade because the hierarchy of terms ensures that the most explicit agreement controls."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is trade usage admissible to explain or supplement express terms in a UCC contract for the sale of goods?", "answer": "Yes. In a UCC contract for the sale of goods, trade usage is admissible to explain or supplement express terms because it is deemed consistent with the express terms unless it completely negates them."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "How can a UCC contract be explained or supplemented if there is nothing in writing to the contrary?", "answer": "A UCC contract may be explained or supplemented by course of dealing, usage of trade, or course of performance because these provide context and clarify the parties' intent."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If parties to a contract have differing interpretations of a material term, whose interpretation controls?", "answer": "If parties to a contract have differing interpretations of a material term, the interpretation of the party who knew the other party's interpretation at the time of contract controls because it reflects the reasonable expectation of the parties."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a delay in delivery constitute a breach of contract if usage in the relevant trade allows a leeway?", "answer": "No. A delay in delivery does not constitute a breach of contract if usage in the relevant trade allows a leeway in the specified time of delivery because trade usage provides flexibility unless expressly negated by the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What controls in a dispute over compensation between an employer and an employee?", "answer": "In a dispute over compensation between an employer and an employee, an express contractual provision regarding compensation will control because it explicitly states the agreed-upon terms."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the best indication of what the parties intended the writing to mean?", "answer": "Course of performance is the best indication of what the parties intended the writing to mean because it reflects how the parties have consistently acted under the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can the terms of a contract be explained or supplemented by parol evidence?", "answer": "Yes. The terms of a contract may be explained or supplemented by parol evidence because it provides additional context and clarifies the parties' intent."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A buyer purchases a laptop from a computer store, and the salesman has to go into the back to get a laptop from inventory to fulfill the order. When is the laptop identified to the contract?", "answer": "The laptop is identified to the contract once the salesman picks the laptop or puts a shipping label on the box because identification links the specific goods to the contract and establishes the buyer's interest."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "When does a buyer of goods obtain an insurable interest in the goods?", "answer": "A buyer of goods obtains an insurable interest in the goods as soon as the goods are identified to the contract because identification links the specific goods to the contract and establishes the buyer's interest."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "How is a contract that requires payment within a time period of completion interpreted?", "answer": "A contract that requires payment within a time period of completion is objectively interpreted to mean within a time period after completion because this interpretation aligns with reasonable expectations."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A beneficiary in whose favor a contract is made is an intended beneficiary. If A enters into a contract with C where A will perform work for C and then C will pay $50,000 to B to repay a debt owed to B by A. If A completes the work but C incurred costs of $3,000 to correct minor problems with the work, how much is C obligated to pay B?", "answer": "C is only obligated to pay $47,000 to B because C stands in the place of A, and B's right is based on the contract between A and C."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Who is an intended beneficiary in a contract?", "answer": "A beneficiary in whose favor a contract is made is an intended beneficiary because the contract specifically aims to benefit that person."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an express promise by a debtor to pay a debt barred by the statute of limitations enforceable without new consideration?", "answer": "Yes. An express promise by a debtor to pay a debt barred by the statute of limitations is legally enforceable without new consideration because the promise revives the obligation."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A man contracts to sell his house to an investor for $500,000, of which $200,000 is to be paid to a hospital. The hospital can sue the investor to enforce its right to the $200,000 payment. Why?", "answer": "The hospital can sue the investor to enforce its right to the $200,000 payment because the contract specifically named the hospital as an intended beneficiary and its contractual rights vested upon the commencement of its lawsuit."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "When do an intended beneficiary's rights vest in a third-party beneficiary contract?", "answer": "An intended beneficiary's rights vest if, before receiving notice of a rescission or modification, the beneficiary materially changes his position in reliance on the promise, brings suit on the promise, or manifests assent to it because these actions solidify the beneficiary's interest in the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A patient becomes seriously infected when a cleaning company fails to meet a local health code. Can the patient sue the cleaning company for breach of contract?", "answer": "No. The patient has no breach of contract claim against the cleaning company because the hospital did not intend to give her the benefit of the performance, making the patient an incidental beneficiary."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a non-contracting party who benefits from a contract between two other persons always an intended beneficiary?", "answer": "No. A non-contracting party who benefits from a contract is an intended beneficiary if the contracting parties intended the benefit to flow to him; otherwise, he is an incidental beneficiary because intent determines the beneficiary's status."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can parties modify a contract for an intended beneficiary after the beneficiary's rights have vested?", "answer": "No. Parties cannot modify the contract once the intended beneficiary's rights have vested because the vested rights protect the beneficiary's interest in the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can an incidental beneficiary sue on a contract they are not a party to?", "answer": "No. An incidental beneficiary has no rights to sue on a contract they are not a party to because only intended beneficiaries have enforceable rights."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a promise in a contract create a duty in the promisor to any intended beneficiary to perform the promise?", "answer": "Yes. A promise in a contract creates a duty in the promisor to any intended beneficiary to perform the promise because the intended beneficiary may enforce the duty."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an intended beneficiary entitled to enforce a promise in a contract?", "answer": "Yes. An intended beneficiary is entitled to enforce a promise in a contract because the promise creates a duty in the promisor to perform the promise for the beneficiary's benefit."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "To be a third party beneficiary, must other parties have a motive to benefit you?", "answer": "Yes. To be a third party beneficiary, other parties must have a motive to benefit you because their intention to benefit you is required for third-party beneficiary status."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a direct promise need to be made to an intended third party beneficiary for that beneficiary to successfully enforce the contract?", "answer": "No. A direct promise does not need to be made to an intended third party beneficiary in order for that beneficiary to successfully enforce the contract because a release of the contract is ineffective without the agreement of the third party beneficiary."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "When do the rights of a third-party beneficiary vest?", "answer": "The rights of a third-party beneficiary vest when the beneficiary manifests assent to the promise, sues to enforce the promise, or justifiably relies on the promise to his detriment because these actions solidify the beneficiary's interest in the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is it a defense for a physician sued for breach of contract for discontinuing treatment to an intended beneficiary that no consideration was furnished by the intended beneficiary?", "answer": "No. It is not a defense that no consideration was furnished by the intended beneficiary or that there was no contract between the physician and the intended beneficiary because the intended beneficiary can still enforce the promise."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a third-party creditor beneficiary of a contract sue the promisor for breach?", "answer": "Yes. A third-party creditor beneficiary of a contract can sue the promisor for breach because the creditor beneficiary has enforceable rights under the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can the original parties to a contract with a third-party beneficiary modify the contract if the beneficiary was not aware of the contract?", "answer": "Yes. The original parties to a contract with a third-party beneficiary can modify the contract if the beneficiary was not aware of the contract because no vesting has occurred."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Who is an intended beneficiary in a contract?", "answer": "A person is an intended beneficiary if the performance of the promise will satisfy an obligation of the promisee to pay money to the beneficiary because the performance is intended to benefit the beneficiary."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What happens if a beneficiary does not fall into the category of an intended beneficiary?", "answer": "If a beneficiary does not fall into the category of an intended beneficiary, he is an incidental beneficiary because the promisee does not intend to give the beneficiary the benefit of the promised performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can an intended beneficiary sue for payment if the promisee has fulfilled his side of the contract and the other side has not paid?", "answer": "Yes. An intended beneficiary can sue for payment if the promisee has fulfilled his side of the contract and the other side has not paid because the beneficiary has enforceable rights under the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an incidental beneficiary have rights under the contract?", "answer": "No. An incidental beneficiary has no rights under the contract because they are not intended beneficiaries."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can third-party beneficiaries enforce a contract if they are donee or creditor beneficiaries?", "answer": "Yes. Under American Law, third-party beneficiaries are entitled to enforce the contract if they are donee beneficiaries or creditor beneficiaries because the promisee intended to confer a benefit on them."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does an incidental beneficiary have rights under the contract?", "answer": "No. An incidental beneficiary is not named in the contract and has no rights under the contract because they are not intended beneficiaries."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a contract is conditioned on the satisfaction of a third person, what is the test for satisfaction?", "answer": "The test is subjective, and the only question is whether the third person honestly believed that the contract was satisfied because the opinions of other reasonable persons are not relevant."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a direct promise need to be made to an intended third party beneficiary for that beneficiary to successfully enforce the contract?", "answer": "No. A direct promise does not need to be made to an intended third party beneficiary in order for that beneficiary to successfully enforce the contract because the third party beneficiary need not be identifiable at the time the contract is formed."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "When does the vesting of third-party beneficiary rights occur?", "answer": "The vesting of third-party beneficiary rights occurs when the beneficiary learns of the contract and assents to it, there is reliance by the beneficiary, or the intended beneficiary sues on the contract because these actions establish the beneficiary's enforceable rights."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can parties to a contract limit the assignment of rights and delegation of duties under the contract?", "answer": "Yes. The parties to a contract can limit both the assignment of rights and the delegation of duties under the contract because they can control how the contract is performed and enforced."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is an assignment in a contract?", "answer": "An assignment is a manifestation of intent of the owner of a right to effectuate a present transfer of the right because it indicates the intent to transfer the right immediately."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If a promisor delegates a duty of performance to a delegatee whose performance is defective, who can the promisee sue?", "answer": "The promisee can sue the promisor for damages if he has not released the promisor and can also sue the delegatee because the promisee is an intended beneficiary of the promisor-delegatee contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What can an assignor assign in a contract?", "answer": "An assignor can assign only the contract rights it actually has, and the assignee stands in the shoes of its assignor and takes subject to those liabilities of its assignor that were in existence at the time of the assignment because the assignee's rights and obligations are derivative of the assignor's."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a delegator liable if a delegatee breaches unless there is a novation?", "answer": "Yes. A delegator is liable if a delegatee breaches unless there is a novation that discharges the delegator's duties because the delegator remains responsible for the performance of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a contract that requires performance of a personal nature involving reputation, taste, and skill be assigned or delegated to another person?", "answer": "No. A contract that requires performance of a personal nature involving reputation, taste, and skill cannot be assigned or delegated to another person unless there is an agreement that permits delegation of these personal duties because such contracts depend on the specific qualities of the original party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can an assignee enforce the assignment if the assignee did not know the contract has an anti-assignment clause?", "answer": "Yes. The assignee can enforce the assignment if the assignee did not know the contract has an anti-assignment clause because the clause only prevents delegating one's duties to another party."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "If an assignee fails to perform, who can the obligor sue?", "answer": "The obligor can sue the assignor if an assignee fails to perform because the assignor remains liable for the performance of the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are contract terms that restrict the right to assign invalid if the assignee is a BFP who is ignorant of the prohibition term?", "answer": "Yes. Contract terms that restrict the right to assign are invalid if the assignee is a BFP who is ignorant of the prohibition term because the assignment is still effective, but the obligator can bring suit against the assignor for breach of the covenant not to assign."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a contract involving personal taste follow a subjective standard?", "answer": "Yes. A contract involving personal taste follows a subjective standard because if you subjectively don't like it, it is a defense to the contract."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A contract is assigned. Who is liable for damages caused by the assignee's default?", "answer": "The assignor is liable for damages caused by the assignee's default, and the assignee is likewise liable for damages due to his default because both parties are responsible for fulfilling the contract's obligations."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A delegation of duties materially alters the performance and creates a significant risk of diminishing the profits. Is this delegation regarded as an anticipatory repudiation of the contract?", "answer": "Yes. A delegation of duties that materially alters the performance and creates a significant risk of diminishing the profits is regarded as an anticipatory repudiation of the contract because the party is unqualified, making the delegation actionable."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A enters into a contract with B, and then A assigns the contract to C. If B pays A, who is liable to C for the payment?", "answer": "A is liable to C for the payment because A assigned the contract to C and is responsible for transferring the payment to C."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "There is no clause to the contrary. Is the assignment of a contract to a person of comparable experience and reputation permitted?", "answer": "Yes. The assignment of a contract to a person of comparable experience and reputation is permitted if there is no clause to the contrary because the other party must accept performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A general assignment is made for the purpose of giving collateral to the assignee in return for a loan. Will the lender normally be deemed to have undertaken to perform the assignor's duties?", "answer": "No. A lender will not normally be deemed to have undertaken to perform the assignor's duties if a general assignment is made for the purpose of giving collateral to the assignee in return for a loan because the lender is not responsible for the assignor's performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can an obligor sue an assignor for wrongful assignment?", "answer": "Yes. An obligor can sue an assignor for wrongful assignment because the assignor is responsible for ensuring the assignment is valid and proper."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is an assignment valid if there is no clear intent from the assignor to transfer his rights completely and immediately to a third party?", "answer": "No. An assignment is not valid if there is no clear intent from the assignor to transfer his rights completely and immediately to a third party because the assignment requires a present transfer of rights."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A symbol of the assignment such as a bank book has been transferred to the assignee. Can the assignment be revoked?", "answer": "No. An assignment cannot be revoked if a symbol of the assignment such as a bank book has been transferred to the assignee because the transfer of the symbol solidifies the assignment."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "The performance of a duty is delegated. Does the delegator remain liable?", "answer": "Yes. The delegator remains liable when the performance of a duty is delegated because the original party to the contract retains responsibility for ensuring performance."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Is a gratuitous assignment revoked if it is given to someone else?", "answer": "Yes. A gratuitous assignment is revoked if it is given to someone else because the assignment is not supported by consideration and can be freely revoked."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A party to a contract delegates his duties to another. Does the original party remain liable on his contract?", "answer": "Yes. The original party remains liable on his contract when he delegates his duties to another because the original party retains responsibility for performance. The person owed can sue both the delegator and the delegatee at the same time."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Does a subassignee have rights against the original assignor?", "answer": "No. A subassignee does not have rights against the original assignor because there is no privity of contract between the subassignee and the original assignor."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "A contract explicitly provides that it cannot be assigned without approval. If the contract is assigned without approval, is it still valid?", "answer": "Yes. A contract is still valid if it is assigned without approval despite an explicit provision requiring approval for assignment because the assignor is liable for breach of a condition, but the assignment remains effective."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "What is the best evidence that a party's duties under the contract were not delegable?", "answer": "An exculpatory clause is the best evidence that a party's duties under the contract were not delegable because it explicitly limits delegation of duties."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are personal service contracts assignable?", "answer": "No. Personal service contracts are not assignable because they depend on the unique qualities and abilities of the individual performing the service."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Are long term requirements contracts assignable?", "answer": "No. Long term requirements contracts are not assignable because they involve ongoing performance and obligations that are specific to the original parties."}
{"topic": "Contracts", "question": "Can a gratuitous assignment be revoked even if the assignee knows about the assignment?", "answer": "Yes. A gratuitous assignment can be revoked even if the assignee knows about the assignment because the assignment lacks consideration and can be freely revoked."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can the police conduct a warrantless search and seizure of historical cell phone records revealing the location of a cell phone user?", "answer": "No. The police cannot conduct a warrantless search and seizure of historical cell phone records revealing the location of a cell phone user because it infringes on the user's reasonable expectation of privacy, violating the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is there a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding accessing historical cell phone location records from a user's mobile service provider?", "answer": "Yes. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding accessing historical cell phone location records from a user's mobile service provider because cellular phone data revealing a person's physical location is not information that one would be aware was being conveyed to a third party."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A state takes DNA samples from people who are arrested but not yet convicted of a serious crime. Is this a Fourth Amendment violation?", "answer": "No. This is not a Fourth Amendment violation because the test serves a legitimate state interest and is not so invasive so as to require a warrant."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it a Fourth Amendment violation to check if DNA matches any samples from unsolved crimes in a national database?", "answer": "No. It is not a Fourth Amendment violation to check if DNA matches any samples from unsolved crimes in a national database because the test serves a legitimate state interest and is not so invasive so as to require a warrant."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Will the Fourth Amendment prevent police officers from aiding somebody in imminent danger under the emergency aid doctrine?", "answer": "No. The Fourth Amendment will not prevent police officers from aiding somebody in imminent danger under the emergency aid doctrine because the police may constitutionally enter protected areas without a warrant if three requirements are met: (1) the existence of an emergency as viewed objectively; (2) a search not motivated by a desire to find evidence; and (3) a nexus between the search and the emergency."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What permits warrantless entries into dwellings or other constitutionally protected areas where extreme circumstances render the procurement of a warrant unreasonable?", "answer": "The exigent circumstances doctrine permits warrantless entries into dwellings or other constitutionally protected areas where extreme circumstances render the procurement of a warrant unreasonable because it includes situations like imminent destruction of evidence, public or police safety, hot pursuit of a suspect, and imminent flight of a suspect."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the plain view doctrine?", "answer": "The plain view doctrine allows items that are within the sight of an officer who is legally in a place from which the view is made, and who had no prior knowledge that the items were present, to be properly seized without a warrant as long as the items are immediately recognizable as subject to seizure. However, the police may not manipulate objects to ascertain evidentiary value because doing so would take the objects out of plain view."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant is arrested in his residence pursuant to an arrest warrant, can the police launch a protective sweep of the residence?", "answer": "Yes. The police can launch a protective sweep of the residence if they have a specific suspicion that people may be hiding and an attack could be launched because the search must last no longer than necessary to dispel the reasonable suspicion of danger and must be limited to where people may be hiding."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it a Fourth Amendment search or seizure for police to examine garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home?", "answer": "No. It is not a Fourth Amendment search or seizure for police to examine garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home because a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such garbage."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If officers have probable cause to believe that drug dealing is routinely taking place in a particular room at a local motel, and they hear running water and a toilet flushing after knocking on the door, are exigent circumstances present?", "answer": "Yes. Exigent circumstances are present because the drugs can easily be destroyed, justifying a warrantless entry."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a warrant needed to enter private property to conduct a search unless exigent circumstances justify immediate action?", "answer": "Yes. A warrant is needed to enter private property to conduct a search unless exigent circumstances justify immediate action. Exigent circumstances include situations where there is an imminent danger to officers or others, the crime has just occurred, evidence is at risk of being destroyed, or the suspect may escape if the police delay to obtain a warrant."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement generally not apply?", "answer": "The exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement generally does not apply when only a minor crime has been committed because the seriousness of the offense and the dangers posed by waiting until a warrant is secured are important considerations."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a stop of a driver be based upon a minor traffic violation that served as a pretext for some other ulterior motive?", "answer": "Yes. A stop of a driver can be based upon a minor traffic violation that served as a pretext for some other ulterior motive because the stop is still considered reasonable under the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a police officer stops a car going 3 mph over the speed limit due to suspicion of drug dealing, and sees a small bag of heroin in plain view, can the officer arrest the driver and passenger?", "answer": "Yes. The police officer can arrest both the driver and passenger because the traffic stop and the officer's order to exit the car do not violate their Fourth Amendment rights."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a stop of a vehicle constitutional if there is probable cause to stop the vehicle, regardless of the officer's subjective motive?", "answer": "Yes. A stop of a vehicle is constitutional if there is probable cause to stop the vehicle, regardless of the officer's subjective motive because the stop is based on an objective standard of probable cause."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A police officer, with a valid arrest warrant, finds a defendant's house unoccupied with doors boarded up and a neighbor stating the house has been empty for months. If the officer forcibly enters and finds cocaine on a table, is the cocaine admissible?", "answer": "No. The cocaine is not admissible because the forcible entry in executing the arrest warrant was only authorized if the police reasonably believed, at the time of entry, that the defendant was at the location."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does an arrest warrant founded on probable cause implicitly carry the limited authority to enter a dwelling in which the suspect lives when there is reason to believe the suspect is within the dwelling?", "answer": "Yes. An arrest warrant founded on probable cause implicitly carries the limited authority to enter a dwelling in which the suspect lives when there is reason to believe the suspect is within the dwelling because circumstances must warrant a reasonable belief that the location to be searched is the suspect's home and that he is within the residence at the time of entry."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A police officer responds to an emergency call and sees a bleeding man on the floor through an open window. If the officer enters the house and finds a bag of cocaine on a bed nearby, is the evidence admissible?", "answer": "Yes. The evidence is admissible because the contraband was found in plain view during the duration of the emergency."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can police conduct an exploratory search for contraband during an emergency once they are inside a home without a warrant?", "answer": "No. Police cannot conduct an exploratory search for contraband during an emergency once they are inside a home without a warrant. They can only seize contraband found in plain view during the duration of the emergency."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If the police officer searches for additional contraband by opening drawers after finding a bleeding man, is any contraband found admissible?", "answer": "No. Any contraband found is inadmissible because the officer exceeded the scope of the warrantless search permissible under the circumstances."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a police officer enter the hotel room of a suspect without a warrant if no exception such as consent or exigent circumstances exists?", "answer": "No. A police officer cannot enter the hotel room of a suspect without a warrant if no exception such as consent or exigent circumstances exists because such an entry would violate the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A search warrant is issued for a specific object. Once the object is discovered, is a further exploratory search of the house justified?", "answer": "No. A further exploratory search of the house is not justified once the specific object is discovered because continuing the search beyond the scope of the warrant violates the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a search warrant is issued for a gun and it is found in a dresser, is finding an illegal object in a footlocker in the house a violation of the Fourth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. Finding an illegal object in a footlocker in the house is a violation of the Fourth Amendment because the search exceeded the scope of the warrant once the gun was found."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a person have a reasonable expectation of privacy to activities conducted in the home that are in full view of the neighbors?", "answer": "No. A person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy to activities conducted in the home that are in full view of the neighbors because such activities are visible to the public, even if the police trespass onto the neighbor's property to observe those activities."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant consents to a search of his home, is evidence found pursuant to the warrantless search admissible?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence found pursuant to the warrantless search is admissible if the police officer reasonably believed that the defendant had actual or apparent authority over the premises when viewed objectively from the officer's perspective."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule apply when evidence is seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment due to clerical errors by court personnel?", "answer": "Yes. The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies when evidence is seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment due to clerical errors by court personnel because the police acted in good faith reliance on the validity of the warrant."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the search of a car incident to arrest valid if the police have reason to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest?", "answer": "Yes. The search of a car incident to arrest is valid if the police have reason to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest because it falls within the scope of a lawful search incident to arrest."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is a private citizen considered a government agent for Fourth Amendment purposes?", "answer": "A private citizen is considered a government agent for Fourth Amendment purposes when the government knows of and acquiesces to the private search and the citizen acts to assist law enforcement because their actions are effectively on behalf of the government."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant is arrested based on probable cause, is a warrantless search valid if it is reasonable in scope and made incident to the arrest?", "answer": "Yes. A warrantless search is valid if it is reasonable in scope and made incident to the arrest because it is justified by the need to ensure officer safety and prevent the destruction of evidence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a landowner have an expectation of privacy in open fields that he owns, even if the fields are fenced and the police breach the fence?", "answer": "No. A landowner does not have an expectation of privacy in open fields that he owns, even if the fields are fenced and the police breach the fence because open fields are not considered part of the curtilage of the home and are therefore not protected by the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Do police have the authority to stop a person who is in a known drug area and who walks away from the police?", "answer": "Yes. Police have the authority to stop a person who is in a known drug area and who walks away from the police because such behavior can be considered suspicious and justify a brief investigatory stop."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant charged with receiving stolen property suppress the evidence recovered if the basis for the search was a statute that deals reasonably with a highly regulated industry?", "answer": "No. A defendant charged with receiving stolen property cannot suppress the evidence recovered if the basis for the search was a statute that deals reasonably with a highly regulated industry because such searches are considered reasonable under the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a criminal wanted for a felony be arrested without a warrant?", "answer": "Yes. A criminal wanted for a felony can be arrested without a warrant because the severity of the crime justifies a warrantless arrest under the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does looking inside boxes in closets exceed the scope of a limited protective sweep for persons hiding in a house that may present a danger to police officers?", "answer": "Yes. Looking inside boxes in closets exceeds the scope of a limited protective sweep for persons hiding in a house that may present a danger to police officers because such a search goes beyond what is necessary to ensure officer safety."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a short-term guest in a home have an expectation of privacy if the homeowner allows the police into the home to search for the guest who is also a felon?", "answer": "No. A short-term guest in a home does not have an expectation of privacy if the homeowner allows the police into the home to search for the guest who is also a felon because the guest's privacy interest is limited and does not extend to overriding the homeowner's consent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a tenant have standing to challenge the search of his apartment, even if he had not paid the rent and was in jail at the time of the search?", "answer": "Yes. A tenant has standing to challenge the search of his apartment, even if he had not paid the rent and was in jail at the time of the search because the tenant retains a reasonable expectation of privacy in the apartment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a landlord's consent to a police officer's search of a defendant's apartment constitute a waiver of the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights?", "answer": "No. A landlord's consent to a police officer's search of a defendant's apartment does not constitute a waiver of the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights because the landlord does not have the actual nor apparent authority to permit the entry."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does police entering a person's backyard without a warrant to search for drugs violate a defendant's reasonable expectation of privacy?", "answer": "Yes. Police entering a person's backyard without a warrant to search for drugs violates a defendant's reasonable expectation of privacy because the backyard is considered part of the curtilage of the home, which is protected under the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a college president's consent to a police search of a student's dormitory waive the student's Fourth Amendment rights?", "answer": "No. A college president's consent to a police search of a student's dormitory does not waive the student's Fourth Amendment rights because it violates the student's reasonable expectation of privacy."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is evidence recovered from a search incident to a valid custodial arrest admissible?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence recovered from a search incident to a valid custodial arrest is admissible because it falls within the scope of a lawful search incident to arrest."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant's bank records be introduced into evidence?", "answer": "Yes. The introduction of a defendant's bank records into evidence is permitted because a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in records that are in the possession of a bank."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the introduction of a defendant's bank records into evidence permitted?", "answer": "Yes. The introduction of a defendant's bank records into evidence is permitted because a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in records that are in the possession of a bank."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a search of a person's car valid if someone with sufficient standing and authority consents to the search?", "answer": "Yes. A search of a person's car is valid if someone who has sufficient standing and authority consents to the search because such consent provides a lawful basis for the search."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is randomly stopping cars in a high crime area without reasonable suspicion of illegal conduct constitutional?", "answer": "No. Randomly stopping cars in a high crime area without reasonable suspicion of illegal conduct is unconstitutional because it violates the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Without a reasonable suspicion of illegal conduct, is randomly stopping cars in a high crime area constitutional?", "answer": "No. Without a reasonable suspicion of illegal conduct, randomly stopping cars in a high crime area is unconstitutional because it violates the Fourth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Must a school principal have probable cause or a warrant to search a student's backpack if the principal is acting as an agent for the police?", "answer": "Yes. A school principal must have probable cause or a warrant to search a student's backpack if the principal is acting as an agent for the police because the principal is subject to the same constitutional standards as the police."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A warrant is based on bad information, and the police officer who submitted the warrant application knew the statement was false. Will items seized be suppressed?", "answer": "Yes. Items seized will be suppressed if the police officer who submitted the warrant application knew the statement was false because the warrant was obtained through false pretenses."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A parolee is required to meet with a probation officer and answer truthfully all questions on penalty of returning to court for a probation revocation hearing. Are Miranda warnings required?", "answer": "No. Miranda warnings are not required because any compulsion felt from the possibility that terminating a meeting would lead to revocation of probation is not comparable to the pressure on a suspect when he literally cannot escape a persistent custodial interrogator."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are police officers required to issue Miranda warnings to every person they question?", "answer": "No. Police officers are not required to issue Miranda warnings to every person they question. Miranda warnings are only required for a person whose freedom is so restricted as to be in custody and being subjected to custodial interrogation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If police observe a defendant driving 45 mph in a 25 mph zone and smell alcohol after pulling him over, are the defendant's statements about drinking admissible at trial?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant's statements about drinking are admissible at trial because the roadside questioning did not rise to the level of custodial interrogation required for Miranda warnings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is there custodial interrogation requiring Miranda warnings if a police officer engages in legitimate, straightforward, and non-coercive questioning necessary to obtain information to issue a traffic citation?", "answer": "No. There is no custodial interrogation requiring Miranda warnings if a police officer engages in legitimate, straightforward, and non-coercive questioning necessary to obtain information to issue a traffic citation because the questioning does not rise to the level of interrogation required for Miranda warnings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Police observe a defendant driving 45 mph in a 25 mph zone, pull him over, smell alcohol, and ask if he had anything to drink. Can his reply that he consumed four beers be used in his trial for DWI?", "answer": "Yes. The statement is admissible at the defendant's trial for DWI because the roadside questioning did not rise to the level of interrogation required for Miranda warnings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can police resume interrogations of a defendant who has exercised his Miranda rights during custody without an attorney present?", "answer": "No. Police cannot resume interrogations of a defendant who has exercised his Miranda rights during custody without an attorney present because the defendant's Miranda rights carry forward for the duration of custody."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant has been out of custody for 14 days, must police give a fresh set of Miranda warnings on day 15 to question him again?", "answer": "Yes. Police must give a fresh set of Miranda warnings on day 15 to question the defendant again because the break in custody is sufficiently long to have dissipated the coercive effect of the initial interrogation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the exceptions to the rule that police cannot re-Mirandize and re-interrogate a defendant who has previously exercised his right to counsel?", "answer": "The exceptions are: (1) the defendant has been released and out of custody for two weeks, or (2) the defendant is in prison, meaning the break in custody is sufficiently long to have dissipated the coercive effect of the initial interrogation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When a defendant exercises his Miranda rights, can police resume interrogations without an attorney present?", "answer": "No. When a defendant exercises his Miranda rights, police cannot resume interrogations without an attorney present unless the defendant has been released and out of custody for two weeks or is in prison."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the privilege against self-incrimination apply to corporations?", "answer": "No. The privilege against self-incrimination does not apply to corporations because it is a personal privilege that only applies to human beings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the privilege against self-incrimination applicable to corporations?", "answer": "No. The privilege against self-incrimination is a personal privilege which only applies to human beings and does not exist for corporations."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A grand jury witness raises her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and refuses to answer a question about her whereabouts on the day of a crime. Can a prosecutor compel the witness to testify by granting her use or derivative-use immunity?", "answer": "Yes. A prosecutor can compel the witness to testify by granting her use or derivative-use immunity, which bars the use of her testimony or any evidence derived from it against her, but need not offer her more expansive transactional immunity."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a prosecutor compel a grand jury witness to testify by granting use or derivative-use immunity?", "answer": "Yes. A prosecutor can compel a grand jury witness to testify by granting use or derivative-use immunity because it bars the use of the testimony or any evidence derived from it against the witness."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a prosecutor seek an immunity order from the judge overseeing the grand jury to compel a witness to testify after the witness invokes the privilege against self-incrimination?", "answer": "Yes. A prosecutor can seek an immunity order from the judge overseeing the grand jury to compel a witness to testify after the witness invokes the privilege against self-incrimination because the U.S. Constitution requires only derivative use immunity, which prohibits the government from directly or derivatively using the grand jury testimony against the witness."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A witness refuses to testify by exercising his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a grand jury proceeding. Is the government required to grant complete immunity from prosecution to compel testimony?", "answer": "No. The government is not required to grant complete immunity from prosecution to compel testimony. It must grant at least use immunity, which excludes the witness's testimony or its fruits from being used against him in future prosecutions."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a witness be compelled to testify after being granted immunity from prosecution?", "answer": "Yes. A witness can be compelled to testify after being granted immunity from prosecution because there is no Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination once immunity is granted, even if only use and derivative-use immunity is granted."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a grand jury witness refuses to answer a question by invoking the Fifth Amendment privilege, can the prosecutor compel testimony by granting transactional immunity?", "answer": "No. The prosecutor need not offer transactional immunity to compel testimony; use or derivative-use immunity is sufficient protection to require the witness to testify over Fifth Amendment objections."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "How is \u201cin custody\u201d determined for Miranda purposes?", "answer": "\u201cIn custody\u201d is determined by an objective test assessing how a reasonable person in the suspect\u2019s shoes would perceive his or her freedom to leave. If the police convey that the accused is not free to leave, then that person will be deemed in custody."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Police execute a valid search warrant at 3 A.M. by entering the suspect\u2019s bedroom and immediately interrogating him on a robbery after yelling, \u201cWe\u2019ve got you now.\u201d Can the suspect suppress his confession?", "answer": "Yes. The suspect can suppress his confession because he was under police custody, deprived of his freedom of action in a significant way, and was not given Miranda warnings before the interrogation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A man who looks like a robbery suspect is stopped by police on the street by a bank and briefly questioned. If the man confesses, is it a violation of the Fourth Amendment or Miranda?", "answer": "No. It is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment or Miranda because the brief questioning on the street does not constitute a custodial interrogation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is Miranda meant to protect against?", "answer": "Miranda is meant to protect against interrogation in an inherently coercive police-dominated environment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does compelling a defendant to say the words spoken by a bank robber violate his privilege against self-incrimination?", "answer": "No. Compelling a defendant to say the words spoken by a bank robber does not violate his privilege against self-incrimination because the privilege extends only to compelled \"testimonial\" communications."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a grand jury compel the production of a suspect's diary without granting immunity?", "answer": "No. A grand jury can only compel the production of a suspect's diary if the suspect is granted immunity to the extent allowed by law, such as use and derivative use immunity for any evidence derived directly or indirectly from the testimonial aspects of the party's immunized testimony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is an incriminating statement volunteered by a defendant and not in response to interrogation by the police admissible?", "answer": "Yes. An incriminating statement that is volunteered by a defendant and not in response to interrogation by the police is admissible because it was not the result of custodial interrogation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Police physically restrain a defendant and threaten his family if he doesn't talk. Are incriminating statements made by the defendant voluntary and admissible?", "answer": "No. Incriminating statements made by a defendant to police after the police physically restrain the defendant and then threaten the defendant's family if he doesn't talk are not voluntary and therefore inadmissible because the statements were made under duress."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it a violation of due process if the prosecution introduces in court the fact that the defendant remained silent while under police questioning?", "answer": "Yes. It is a violation of due process if the prosecution introduces in court the fact that the defendant remained silent while under police questioning because post-arrest silence constitutes the defendant's exercise of his Miranda rights."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are Miranda warnings required in a non-custodial interrogation?", "answer": "No. Miranda warnings are not required in a non-custodial interrogation, and an incriminating statement freely made and voluntarily given is admissible."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "In a non-custodial interrogation, are Miranda warnings required for an incriminating statement to be admissible?", "answer": "No. In a non-custodial interrogation, Miranda warnings are not required and an incriminating statement freely made and voluntarily given is admissible because it was not made under custodial conditions."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are all fruits of an unlawful arrest suppressed, even if incriminating statements are given after Miranda warnings?", "answer": "Yes. All fruits of an unlawful arrest are suppressed, even if incriminating statements are given after Miranda warnings, in order to purge the taint of the illegal arrest."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are volunteered statements given after Miranda warnings admissible if they are not the result of interrogation?", "answer": "Yes. Volunteered statements given after Miranda warnings are admissible because they are not the result of interrogation and are therefore considered voluntary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a waiver of Miranda rights depend upon the nature of the charges that are later filed against the defendant?", "answer": "No. A waiver of Miranda rights does not depend upon the nature of the charges that are later filed against the defendant because the waiver is based on the defendant's understanding and voluntary relinquishment of the rights at the time of the waiver."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant states he will talk after Miranda warnings but won't put anything in writing until he has a lawyer. Are the oral statements admissible?", "answer": "Yes. The oral statements are admissible because the defendant's conditional willingness to talk does not invalidate the statements made."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a grant of \u201cuse and derivative use\u201d immunity sufficient to extinguish the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination?", "answer": "Yes. A grant of \u201cuse and derivative use\u201d immunity is sufficient to extinguish the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination because it provides adequate protection against the use of the compelled testimony or its derivatives in future prosecutions."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a mentally ill person waive his Miranda rights if there was no police coercion?", "answer": "Yes. A mentally ill person can waive his Miranda rights so long as there was no police coercion because the waiver must be voluntary, knowing, and intelligent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does an accused have a Sixth Amendment right to counsel at an initial appearance?", "answer": "No. An accused does not have a Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel at an initial appearance because it is not considered a critical stage of a criminal proceeding."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant entitled to counsel at a physical lineup that occurs after the defendant has been formally charged?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is entitled to counsel at a physical lineup that occurs after the defendant has been formally charged because it is a critical stage of the proceedings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant entitled to counsel at an initial appearance under the Sixth Amendment?", "answer": "No. A defendant is not entitled to counsel at an initial appearance under the Sixth Amendment because it is not a critical stage of a criminal proceeding."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant entitled to counsel at pre-charge lineups or pre- or post-charge photo identifications?", "answer": "No. A defendant is not entitled to counsel at pre-charge lineups or pre- or post-charge photo identifications because these stages do not involve significant rights requiring the presence of counsel."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under the Sixth Amendment, is an accused entitled to appointed counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings once they are initiated by formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment?", "answer": "Yes. Under the Sixth Amendment, an accused is entitled to appointed counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings once they are initiated by formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment because these stages involve significant rights and the presence of counsel is necessary to ensure a fair trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does an accused have a Sixth Amendment right to appointed counsel?", "answer": "An accused is entitled to appointed counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings once they are initiated by formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment because these stages involve significant rights of the accused."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is proof of an out-of-court identification or an in-court identification admissible if the photographic display is impermissibly suggestive?", "answer": "Yes. Proof of an out-of-court identification or an in-court identification is admissible if the eyewitness's identification is shown to be reliable under a multi-factor inquiry despite the photographic display being impermissibly suggestive."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the two possible challenges to an out-of-court identification?", "answer": "The two possible challenges to an out-of-court identification are: (1) defense counsel was not present at the pre-trial confrontation; or (2) the pre-trial confrontation was so impermissibly suggestive as to give rise to a very substantial likelihood of misidentification."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defense lawyer fails to advise a defendant that his guilty plea carries a risk of deportation, is the defendant's counsel considered ineffective?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant's counsel is considered ineffective if the defense lawyer fails to advise that a guilty plea carries a risk of deportation because a reasonable lawyer would inform the client of the risk to allow the client to make an informed decision."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, does defense counsel have an affirmative duty to provide correct advice to a non-citizen client about the risk of adverse immigration consequences of a guilty plea?", "answer": "Yes. Under the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, defense counsel has an affirmative duty to provide correct advice to a non-citizen client about the risk of adverse immigration consequences of a guilty plea because it allows the client to make an informed decision whether to go to trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Defense counsel fails to investigate his client's severely deprived upbringing or present mitigating evidence that may have avoided the death penalty. Is this likely ineffective assistance of counsel?", "answer": "Yes. This is likely ineffective assistance of counsel because the failure to investigate and present mitigating evidence constitutes serious errors that deprived the defendant of a fair trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the two-part standard established in Strickland to establish a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal?", "answer": "The two-part standard established in Strickland to establish a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal is: (1) the defendant has the burden of proving that his trial lawyer's performance was deficient, which requires showing serious specific errors of a type that a reasonably competent professional would not make; and (2) the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense, meaning that counsel's errors were so serious that the defendant was deprived of a fair trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must a defendant show to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel?", "answer": "To state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show that: (1) his attorney's conduct fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) prejudice, meaning that there is a reasonable probability that, but for his attorney's unprofessional errors, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must a defendant seeking to represent himself be shown?", "answer": "A defendant seeking to represent himself must be shown to have an awareness of the magnitude of the task confronting him and the disadvantages of representing himself because merely making the defendant aware of his constitutional right to counsel is insufficient to establish a valid waiver."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant is indicted for murder and raises an insanity defense. The prosecutor hires a forensic psychologist to impersonate a social worker to examine the defendant. Can the prosecutor call the psychologist to testify against the defendant?", "answer": "No. The prosecutor cannot call the psychologist to testify against the defendant because it violates the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel that attached when the defendant was indicted, prohibiting the use of deception to elicit the defendant's statements relating to the crime without the assistance of counsel or a valid waiver."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does the right to counsel attach after a suspect is indicted?", "answer": "The right to counsel attaches after a suspect is indicted, and it is a violation of that right for a secret agent acting on behalf of the government to deliberately elicit incriminating statements from the suspect in the absence of counsel."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Miranda warnings are given to a defendant during a custodial interrogation, and the defendant knowingly signs a waiver form. The defendant later states, \"I think I need an attorney.\" Can interrogating officers continue with the interrogation?", "answer": "Yes. The interrogating officers can continue with the interrogation because the defendant's statement was ambiguous and did not effectively assert the right to counsel."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must a suspect under custodial interrogation do to assert his Miranda rights post-waiver effectively?", "answer": "A suspect under custodial interrogation must make a clear and unequivocal assertion of his Miranda rights post-waiver because any ambiguity or equivocation will be ineffective."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a witness subpoenaed by a grand jury have a constitutional right to counsel inside a grand jury room?", "answer": "No. A witness subpoenaed by a grand jury does not have a constitutional right to counsel inside a grand jury room because the constitutional right to advice of counsel does not extend to the grand jury room."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are statements made by a defendant to a person hired by the defendant's attorney in the course of the legal representation protected by attorney-client privilege?", "answer": "Yes. Statements made by a defendant to a person hired by the defendant's attorney in the course of the legal representation are protected by attorney-client privilege because they are made in confidence for the purpose of seeking legal advice."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the right to counsel violated if the police have an informant elicit information from a defendant who is in custody and awaiting trial, even if the informant is not interrogating the defendant?", "answer": "Yes. The right to counsel is violated because the police are using the informant to elicit information from the defendant without counsel present, infringing on the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What duty does due process place upon the prosecution under Brady?", "answer": "Under Brady, due process places upon the prosecution a continuing duty to disclose to the defense evidence that is both favorable to the defense and material to either guilt or punishment because such evidence is considered exculpatory."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Where the outcome of a case turns on the credibility of a single prosecution witness, is evidence that adversely impacts his credibility considered Brady material?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence that adversely impacts the credibility of a single prosecution witness is considered Brady material because it constitutes exculpatory evidence that could affect the determination of guilt or innocence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant's attorney attempts to strike a prospective juror for cause because the juror thinks they will be biased. If the judge refuses to dismiss the juror and the attorney uses a peremptory challenge to remove the juror, does the defendant have grounds to appeal if convicted?", "answer": "No. The defendant has no grounds to appeal based on the prospective juror because the juror did not serve on the jury."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant's exercise of peremptory challenges denied or impaired when choosing to use such a challenge to remove a juror who should have been excused for cause?", "answer": "No. A defendant's exercise of peremptory challenges is not denied or impaired when choosing to use such a challenge to remove a juror who should have been excused for cause because the juror did not serve on the jury."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant becomes unruly when a witness is called to testify and is warned by the judge that he will be removed if he persists in his disruptive behavior. If the defendant continues to behave disruptively, does he lose his right to be present at his own trial?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant loses his right to be present at his own trial because his behavior precludes an orderly trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can the Sixth Amendment right to be present at one's own trial be forfeited?", "answer": "Yes. The Sixth Amendment right to be present at one's own trial may be forfeited by disruptive behavior or the accused's voluntary absence after the trial has commenced because such actions undermine the orderly conduct of the trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant waive his right to be present at the trial or portions of the trial?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can waive his right to be present at the trial or portions of the trial because the right to be present can be voluntarily relinquished by the defendant."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a criminal defendant have a due process constitutional right to be present at every critical stage of the trial?", "answer": "Yes. A criminal defendant has a due process constitutional right to be present at every critical stage of the trial, from jury selection to sentencing, because the presence of the defendant is necessary to ensure a fair trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the untimely disclosure of evidence favorable to the defense violate the Constitution if the evidence would have created a reasonable probability of a different outcome had it been disclosed earlier?", "answer": "Yes. The untimely disclosure of evidence favorable to the defense violates the Constitution if the evidence would have created a reasonable probability of a different outcome had it been disclosed earlier because it undermines the fairness of the trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The prosecution fails to disclose a witness's prior perjury conviction until the defense almost rests its case, and the witness is now unavailable to be impeached. If the jury convicts the defendant, must the court grant a retrial?", "answer": "Yes. The court must grant a retrial because it is reasonably probable that the defendant might not have been convicted if he was given timely access to the information favorable to his case."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Two defendants are tried jointly for a crime, and the first defendant makes statements to a cellmate that incriminate him and the second defendant. Can the court admit the cellmate's testimony of the first defendant's out-of-court statements?", "answer": "No. The court cannot admit the cellmate's testimony of the first defendant's out-of-court statements because the limiting instruction will not adequately safeguard the jury from considering the testimony against the second defendant, thus violating his Sixth Amendment right to confront his accusers."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When two defendants are tried together for the same crime, can the admission of one defendant's confession be cured by a limiting instruction?", "answer": "No. The admission of one defendant's confession cannot be cured by a limiting instruction because it is so prejudicial to the second defendant that it violates his Sixth Amendment right to confront his accusers."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A bookmaker is indicted for illegal gambling based solely on an in-court undercover agent's testimony that re-tells an informant's out-of-court statements. Will the judge dismiss the indictment?", "answer": "No. The judge will not dismiss the indictment because the grand jury is making a probable cause determination rather than a trial verdict, and hearsay or illegally obtained evidence does not invalidate a facially valid indictment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Will a facially valid indictment be dismissed if it is based on hearsay or illegally obtained evidence?", "answer": "No. A facially valid indictment will not be dismissed if it is based on hearsay or illegally obtained evidence because these rules do not apply to grand jury proceedings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a juror be excused for cause if his views would substantially impair an impartial decision?", "answer": "Yes. A juror can be excused for cause if his views would substantially impair an impartial decision because such views prevent the juror from fulfilling his duty to decide the case based on the evidence and the law."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "In a capital case that could result in a defendant's life imprisonment or death, can a juror with views on the death penalty that will substantially impair his ability to impartially determine its appropriateness be excused for cause?", "answer": "Yes. The juror can be excused for cause because his views on the death penalty substantially impair his ability to impartially determine its appropriateness, and excusing him does not violate the fair cross-section right of the Sixth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "In state criminal trials, if a six-person jury is used, must the verdict be unanimous for the conviction to be valid under the U.S. Constitution?", "answer": "Yes. In state criminal trials, if a six-person jury is used, the verdict must be unanimous for the conviction to be valid under the U.S. Constitution because unanimity ensures the reliability of the verdict."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a prosecutor who peremptorily excuses all nonwhites from a jury based solely on race violate the Equal Protection Clause?", "answer": "Yes. A prosecutor who peremptorily excuses all nonwhites from a jury based solely on race violates the Equal Protection Clause because such actions constitute racial discrimination in jury selection."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is there a constitutional requirement that all known charges be brought in the same prosecution against a defendant?", "answer": "No. There is no constitutional requirement that all known charges be brought in the same prosecution against a defendant because separate prosecutions for different offenses do not violate the Constitution."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If there is conflicting testimony about what crimes a defendant committed, can the jury return a verdict for either crime?", "answer": "Yes. If there is conflicting testimony about what crimes a defendant committed, the jury can return a verdict for either crime because the jury is responsible for weighing the evidence and determining the facts."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a plea be vacated if the prosecutor withdraws from the plea bargain deal?", "answer": "Yes. A plea can be vacated if the prosecutor withdraws from the plea bargain deal because the defendant's agreement to plead guilty is contingent upon the prosecutor fulfilling the terms of the plea bargain."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Must any fact that increases the penalty beyond the statutory maximum period be proved beyond a reasonable doubt?", "answer": "Yes. Any fact that increases the penalty beyond the statutory maximum period must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt because it is a constitutional requirement to ensure fairness and accuracy in sentencing."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Will a departure from Sentencing Guidelines be upheld if the sentencing court provided acceptable reasons for the departure and the degree of departure was reasonable?", "answer": "Yes. A departure from Sentencing Guidelines will be upheld if the sentencing court provided acceptable reasons for the departure and the degree of departure was reasonable because the court's rationale and the reasonableness of the departure are key factors in upholding the decision."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Who bears the burden of proof to establish the affirmative defense of entrapment?", "answer": "The defendant bears the burden of proof to establish the affirmative defense of entrapment because the defense must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the government induced the defendant to commit the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a defendant's incompetency to stand trial depend on his mental state at the time of the trial?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant's incompetency to stand trial depends on his mental state at the time of the trial because the ability to understand the proceedings and assist in the defense is crucial for a fair trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Who bears the burden of proof of competency once the issue has been raised, and by what standard must it be proved?", "answer": "The prosecution bears the burden of proof of competency once the issue has been raised, and it usually must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence because it is the prosecution's responsibility to demonstrate that the defendant is competent to stand trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a confession of a co-conspirator admissible at the defendant's trial if the co-conspirator does not testify and cannot be cross-examined?", "answer": "No. A confession of a co-conspirator is inadmissible at the defendant's trial unless the co-conspirator testifies and can be cross-examined because the defendant has the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "How is the unchanged condition of an exhibit like drugs established?", "answer": "The unchanged condition of an exhibit like drugs is established through chain of custody because it proves the continuous control and unchanged condition of the evidence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Police see the defendant drop a bag of white powder and run away. A few minutes later, the police retrieve the bag after arresting the defendant. Is this sufficient to prove a chain of custody to have the evidence admitted?", "answer": "Yes. This is sufficient to prove a chain of custody to have the evidence admitted because the continuous control and unchanged condition of the evidence can be established."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must evidence admitted at trial be?", "answer": "Evidence admitted at trial must be authenticated because someone must lay a sufficient foundation so that the trier of fact is able to determine that the evidence is what it is supposed to be."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does the Federal Rules of Evidence bar regarding testimony or statements by jurors?", "answer": "The Federal Rules of Evidence bars testimony or statements by jurors offered to prove virtually anything about deliberations, including any matter occurring or statement made, or the effect of anything on the mind or emotions of any juror, or the mental processes of the juror whose testimony or statement is offered."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Each juror states in writing his opinion of what the money damages should be, and the amounts are totaled and divided by the number of jurors to reach a figure for the award. Is this legal?", "answer": "No. This is illegal because it constitutes a quotient verdict that ignores the judge's instruction to look at liability and is grounds for a new trial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is grounds for a new trial regarding a quotient verdict?", "answer": "A quotient verdict that ignores the judge's instruction to look at liability is grounds for a new trial because it is illegal and improper."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant is charged with aggravated theft, but there is a dispute as to the value of the stolen property with the defendant arguing the crime is simple theft. Should the trial court instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple theft?", "answer": "Yes. The trial court should instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple theft because there is a rational basis for the lesser charge and the jury could rationally find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense yet acquit him of the greater."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is a defendant entitled to a lesser-included-offense instruction?", "answer": "A defendant is entitled to a lesser-included-offense instruction if: (1) the elements of the lesser offense are a subset of the elements of the charged offense; and (2) the evidence at trial is such that a jury could rationally find the defendant guilty of the lesser offense yet acquit him of the greater."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant is charged with first-degree murder and second-degree murder. If the defendant is found guilty of second-degree murder, can the defendant be tried for first-degree murder at a new trial?", "answer": "No. The defendant cannot be tried for first-degree murder at a new trial because the conviction of the lesser-included offense of second-degree murder constitutes an implied acquittal of the more serious offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does a conviction of a lesser-included offense constitute?", "answer": "A conviction of a lesser-included offense constitutes an implied acquittal of the more serious offense, thus barring retrial on that greater charge."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the inability of a judge to complete a trial due to a death in the family constitute a manifest necessity for a mistrial?", "answer": "No. The inability of a judge to complete a trial due to a death in the family does not constitute a manifest necessity for a mistrial, especially when the court sua sponte declares a mistrial without the defendant's consent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What happens if a court sua sponte declares a mistrial without the defendant's consent due to the judge's inability to complete the trial?", "answer": "A second trial should be barred because it would violate the prohibition against double jeopardy, as the inability of the judge to complete the trial does not constitute a manifest necessity for a mistrial."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can two different states try a person for the same crime without violating the double jeopardy clause?", "answer": "Yes. Two different states may try a person for the same crime without violating the double jeopardy clause because there is no double jeopardy between sovereigns, even if it is the same exact crime with the same exact elements."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does the double jeopardy clause prevent?", "answer": "The double jeopardy clause prevents a person from being tried twice for the same crime because it protects individuals from repeated prosecutions for the same offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant be indicted by a grand jury if a judge had previously dismissed the charge at a preliminary hearing for failure to establish probable cause?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can be indicted by a grand jury even if a judge had previously dismissed the charge at a preliminary hearing for failure to establish probable cause because the defendant was never in jeopardy of conviction on the charge."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does double jeopardy attach?", "answer": "Double jeopardy attaches only when the jury or the first witness (at a bench trial) is sworn in because it is at this point that the defendant is in jeopardy of conviction."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does double jeopardy attach at a preliminary hearing or grand jury proceeding?", "answer": "No. Double jeopardy does not attach at a preliminary hearing or grand jury proceeding because these proceedings do not place the defendant in jeopardy of conviction, meaning the same charges can be brought against the defendant at more than one grand jury."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a driver who hits a pedestrian and then pleads guilty to reckless driving still be charged with manslaughter if, years later, the pedestrian dies from those injuries?", "answer": "Yes. A driver who hits a pedestrian and then pleads guilty to reckless driving can still be charged with manslaughter if, years later, the pedestrian dies from those injuries because the subsequent death constitutes a new element of the offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can courts use bright line cutoffs such as an IQ test score of 70 to determine whether a person has severe intellectual disabilities for purposes of the Eighth Amendment?", "answer": "No. Courts may not use bright line cutoffs such as an IQ test score of 70 to determine whether a person has severe intellectual disabilities because they must consider all evidence pertinent to the disability claim, including adaptive behavior assessments."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the execution of people with severe intellectual disabilities violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment?", "answer": "Yes. The execution of people with severe intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment because such individuals are constitutionally different from those without intellectual disabilities."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are children constitutionally different from adults for sentencing purposes under the Eighth Amendment?", "answer": "Yes. Children are constitutionally different from adults for sentencing purposes under the Eighth Amendment because their developmental status and potential for rehabilitation must be considered."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a life-without-parole sentence permissible for a juvenile defendant convicted of a non-homicide offense?", "answer": "No. A life-without-parole sentence is not permissible for a juvenile defendant convicted of a non-homicide offense because it is an unconstitutionally disproportionate punishment under the Eighth Amendment."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must occur if a finding exposes a defendant to a sentence beyond the maximum amount provided by the substantive statute in question?", "answer": "A defendant has a constitutional right to have the required finding determined by a jury, not a judge, and that such facts are proven beyond a reasonable doubt because only a jury may determine the imposition of sentencing enhancements."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What test is applied in deciding whether to overturn a sentence for failure to submit a sentencing factor to the jury?", "answer": "The harmless error test is applied because it determines whether the failure to submit a sentencing factor to the jury affected the defendant's substantial rights and the outcome of the proceedings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What happens if the prosecution fails to prove each of the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt?", "answer": "The trier of fact must find the defendant not guilty because the prosecution has not met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Who bears the burden of proof for an affirmative defense in a criminal case?", "answer": "The defendant bears the burden of proof for an affirmative defense because the defendant must prove each essential element of the defense by a preponderance of the evidence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Who bears the burden of proof in criminal cases?", "answer": "The prosecution bears the burden of proof in criminal cases because it must prove each of the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does due process require the prosecution to prove all elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt?", "answer": "Yes. Due process requires the prosecution to prove all elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt because it is a fundamental principle ensuring fairness and accuracy in criminal proceedings."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the prosecution have the burden of disproving an alibi beyond a reasonable doubt?", "answer": "Yes. The prosecution has the burden of disproving an alibi beyond a reasonable doubt because an alibi negates an essential element of the crime, which is the defendant's actual commission of it."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If the crime of rape is defined as sexual penetration inflicted on an unconsenting person by means of force or violence, who bears the burden of proving that the victim did not consent?", "answer": "The prosecution bears the burden of proving that the victim did not consent because it is an essential element of the crime of rape that must be established beyond a reasonable doubt."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required to convict a defendant of a crime?", "answer": "To convict a defendant, there must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to prove all of the elements included in the definition of the offense because this ensures the defendant's guilt is established to a high standard of certainty."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a state's elimination of the insanity defense constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. A state's elimination of the insanity defense is constitutional because the state has the authority to define the elements of criminal offenses and defenses."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can offenses be joined for trial if they are of the same or similar character?", "answer": "Yes. Offenses may be joined for trial if they are of the same or similar character because it allows for judicial efficiency and consistency in the adjudication of related charges."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant shoots a gun at his wife with the intent to kill her, but misses and kills her coworker. Can the defendant be charged with murder of the coworker and attempted murder of his wife?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can be charged with murder of the coworker and attempted murder of his wife because the intent to harm his wife is transferred to the coworker who was actually harmed, and the two charges need not be tried together because each is a separate and independent offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the doctrine of transferred intent?", "answer": "The doctrine of transferred intent applies when an individual has the intent to harm one particular individual or object, and in the act of trying to accomplish that harm, another is injured because the intent to harm the original party can be transferred to the party that actually was injured."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Dan agrees with Doug to rob Paul, but Dan was unaware that Doug had a gun. Can Dan be found guilty of conspiracy to commit armed robbery?", "answer": "No. Dan cannot be found guilty of conspiracy to commit armed robbery because he was unaware a gun would be used in the robbery, meaning the elements of conspiracy to commit armed robbery are lacking."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Dan agrees with Doug to rob Paul, but Dan was unaware that Doug had a gun. Can Dan be found guilty of conspiracy to commit armed robbery?", "answer": "No. If Dan agrees with Doug to rob Paul but is unaware that Doug has a gun, Dan can be found guilty of conspiracy to commit robbery but not conspiracy to commit armed robbery because Dan was unaware a gun would be used in the robbery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the elements of conspiracy as a specific intent crime?", "answer": "The elements of conspiracy as a specific intent crime are: (1) the intent to agree, or conspire; and (2) the intent to commit the offense which is the object of the conspiracy."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the elements of conspiracy?", "answer": "Conspiracy is a specific intent crime involving two elements: (1) the intent to agree, or conspire; and (2) the intent to commit the offense which is the object of the conspiracy. To sustain a conviction for conspiracy to commit a particular offense, the prosecution must show not only that the conspirators intended to agree but also that they intended to commit the elements of that offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must the prosecution show to sustain a conviction for conspiracy to commit a particular offense?", "answer": "The prosecution must show that the conspirators intended to agree and that they intended to commit the elements of that offense because both intents are necessary to prove the crime of conspiracy."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant offers to sell illegal narcotics to an undercover police officer but has no narcotics in his possession. Can the defendant be found guilty of criminal solicitation?", "answer": "Yes. If the defendant offers to sell illegal narcotics to an undercover police officer but has no narcotics in his possession, the defendant can still be found guilty of criminal solicitation for attempting to cause the officer to commit the crime of possessing a controlled substance."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant tries to sell harmless oregano disguised as an illegal narcotic. Can the defendant be found guilty of solicitation?", "answer": "No. If the defendant tries to sell harmless oregano disguised as an illegal narcotic, the defendant cannot be found guilty of solicitation because the defendant was not actually selling illegal narcotics."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant offers to sell illegal narcotics to an undercover police officer who immediately arrests the defendant but finds no narcotics in his possession. Can the defendant be found guilty of criminal solicitation?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can be found guilty of criminal solicitation for attempting to cause the officer to commit the crime of possessing a controlled substance because the solicitation was made with the intent that the crime be committed."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant tries to sell harmless oregano disguised as an illegal narcotic. Can the defendant be found guilty of solicitation?", "answer": "No. The defendant cannot be found guilty of solicitation because he was not actually selling illegal narcotics and therefore did not have the intent to solicit the commission of a crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does solicitation occur?", "answer": "Solicitation occurs when the defendant entices, encourages, or advises another to commit a crime with the intent that the other person commit the crime because the crime of solicitation is complete once the solicitation is made."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does solicitation occur?", "answer": "Solicitation occurs when the defendant entices, encourages, or advises another to commit a crime with the intent that the other person commit the crime. The crime of solicitation is complete once the solicitation is made."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant makes a verbal agreement with a hit man and meets him for payment. Is this enough to find the defendant guilty of attempted murder?", "answer": "No. A verbal agreement with a hit man and meeting him for payment is enough to find the defendant guilty of solicitation of murder but not enough to find the defendant guilty of attempted murder because these acts of preparation are not dangerously proximate to committing the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant verbally agrees with a hit man and meets him for payment. Is the defendant guilty of attempted murder?", "answer": "No. These acts of preparation are not enough to find the defendant guilty of attempted murder because they are not dangerously proximate to the commission of the intended crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant verbally agrees with a hit man and meets him for payment. Is the defendant guilty of solicitation of murder?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is guilty of solicitation of murder because these acts constitute solicitation by enticing or encouraging another to commit a crime with intent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant be found guilty of conspiracy in a unilateral jurisdiction but not in a bilateral jurisdiction?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant could be found guilty of conspiracy in a unilateral jurisdiction but not in a bilateral jurisdiction because the latter requires at least two of the alleged conspirators to intend to agree to commit the offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is mere solicitation enough to constitute an attempt under the common law?", "answer": "No. Mere solicitation, unaccompanied by a sufficient step moving directly toward the commission of the intended crime, is not dangerously proximate enough to constitute an attempt under the common law."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What constitutes an attempt under the common law?", "answer": "Under the common law, an attempt requires an act that is dangerously proximate to the commission of the intended crime because mere solicitation, unaccompanied by a sufficient step moving directly toward the commission of the crime, is not enough."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is the defendant guilty of conspiracy in a unilateral jurisdiction but not in a bilateral jurisdiction?", "answer": "The defendant is guilty of conspiracy in a unilateral jurisdiction if he has an agreement with another person, but not in a bilateral jurisdiction because this requires at least two of the alleged conspirators to intend to agree to commit the offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the elements of solicitation at common law?", "answer": "At common law, solicitation occurs when a defendant: (1) requests or encourages another; (2) to perform a criminal act, regardless of whether the latter agrees."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the difference between solicitation and conspiracy?", "answer": "The difference between solicitation and conspiracy is asking versus the agreement. Solicitation involves requesting or encouraging another to perform a criminal act, while conspiracy involves an agreement to commit a criminal act."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must the defendant intend to satisfy the mens rea necessary to commit solicitation?", "answer": "The defendant must intend that the individual solicited commit the crime because solicitation is a specific intent crime requiring the mens rea of intent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does solicitation occur at common law?", "answer": "At common law, solicitation occurs when a defendant: (1) requests or encourages another; (2) to perform a criminal act, regardless of whether the latter agrees. Solicitation is a specific intent crime so the defendant must intend that the individual solicited commit the crime to satisfy the mens rea necessary to commit solicitation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Dave hires a hit man to kill Victor. Victor is murdered by the hit man. Is Dave guilty of both conspiracy and murder?", "answer": "Yes. Dave is guilty of both conspiracy and murder because the crime of conspiracy does not merge with the substantive offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Diana asks Doug to murder Victor. Doug attempts the crime. Can Diana and Doug be found guilty of solicitation?", "answer": "No. Diana and Doug cannot be found guilty of solicitation because the attempt absorbs the solicitation, meaning they can be found guilty of attempted murder but not solicitation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does solicitation merge into conspiracy, attempt, and the substantive crime?", "answer": "Yes. Solicitation merges into conspiracy, attempt, and the substantive crime because the solicitation is absorbed by the subsequent acts of conspiracy, attempt, or completion of the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the crime of conspiracy merge with the substantive offense?", "answer": "No. The crime of conspiracy does not merge with the substantive offense because they are separate and distinct crimes, meaning a defendant can be convicted of both conspiracy and the substantive offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If Dave hires a hit man to kill Victor, and Victor is murdered by the hit man, what crimes is Dave guilty of?", "answer": "Dave is guilty of both conspiracy and murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If Diana asks Doug to murder Victor and Doug attempts the crime, what crimes can Diana and Doug be found guilty of?", "answer": "Diana and Doug can be found guilty of attempted murder but not solicitation because attempt absorbs solicitation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant withdraw from liability for the conspiracy itself?", "answer": "No. A defendant can never withdraw from liability for the conspiracy itself, but he can withdraw from the subsequent crimes of co-conspirators if the defendant gives notice and takes an affirmative step to prevent the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is the crime of conspiracy complete?", "answer": "The crime of conspiracy is complete once there is an agreement and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. An overt act is an open act that shows an intention to commit a crime, but the overt act does not have to be criminal in nature and mere preparation will usually suffice if the preparation was done with the intent to complete the crime. A defendant can never withdraw from liability for the conspiracy itself, but he can withdraw from the subsequent crimes of co-conspirators if the defendant gives notice and takes an affirmative step to prevent the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a man wants to kill his wife and hires a hit man (who is actually an undercover cop), and pays him $20,000, is the man guilty of conspiracy to murder his wife in a jurisdiction that follows the unilateral theory of conspiracy?", "answer": "Yes. The man is guilty of conspiracy to murder his wife because he believed that he had an agreement with another person that would result in his wife's death, and a unilateral conspiracy is formed when a person agrees with another person, even if the other person only feigns agreement."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the Model Penal Code's unilateral approach to conspiracy?", "answer": "Under the Model Penal Code's unilateral approach to conspiracy (adopted by most jurisdictions), the act of a single individual who believes that he or she is agreeing with another person to commit a crime is sufficient to establish a conspiracy. This means there does not need to be a meeting of the minds. A person is guilty of being a conspirator under the unilateral approach even if his or her co-conspirator is never found or identified, is not charged, or is acquitted. For example, if a man wants to kill his wife and hires a hit man (who is actually an undercover cop), and pays him $20,000, the man is guilty of conspiracy to murder his wife in a jurisdiction that follows the unilateral theory of conspiracy, because the man believed that he had an agreement with another person that would result in his wife's death, and a unilateral conspiracy is formed when a person agrees with another person, even if the other person only feigns agreement. NOTE: In addition, some jurisdictions require an overt act in furtherance of that agreement, such as paying money or procuring a needed material."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant, intending to kill his mother, puts a deadly poison in his mother's glass of milk, but changes his mind and hides the glass behind a flower vase on the table, and his son accidentally drinks it and dies, what crimes can the defendant be found guilty of?", "answer": "The defendant can be found guilty of attempted murder of the mother since the defendant, with a specific intent to murder the mother, took a substantial step towards killing her. As for the killing of the son, the defendant can be found guilty of murder if the jury determines his conduct as depraved indifference to human life (depraved-heart murder), or manslaughter if the jury finds only criminal negligence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required for an attempt charge under the Model Penal Code?", "answer": "Attempt requires a specific intent to commit the crime and an act beyond mere preparation in furtherance of the crime. To be guilty of attempted murder, there must be specific intent to commit the murder and a substantial step in the commission or attempted commission of the crime of murder. For example, if a defendant, intending to kill his mother, puts a deadly poison in his mother's glass of milk, but changes his mind and hides the glass behind a flower vase on the table, and his son accidentally drinks it and dies, the defendant can be found guilty of attempted murder of the mother since the defendant, with a specific intent to murder the mother, took a substantial step towards killing her. As for the killing of the son, the defendant can be found guilty of murder if the jury determines his conduct as depraved indifference to human life (depraved-heart murder), or manslaughter if the jury finds only criminal negligence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a robber dresses as a pirate and points a knife at a drunk man yelling 'your money or your life,' but the drunk man instead laughs and walks away without giving the robber any money, what is the most serious crime the robber can be charged with?", "answer": "The most serious crime that the robber can be charged with is attempted robbery since he had the specific intent to deprive another of his property by force or fear."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the requirements for robbery?", "answer": "Robbery requires that the taking of another's property be accomplished through force or putting in fear. If the robber uses a threat of force but the victim does not take it as such, a critical element of robbery is absent, and the most serious charge the robber could be convicted of is attempted robbery. For example, if a robber dresses as a pirate and points a knife at a drunk man yelling \"your money or your life,\" but the drunk man instead laughs and walks away without giving the robber any money, the most serious crime that the robber can be charged with is attempted robbery since he had the specific intent to deprive another of his property by force or fear."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can conspiracy be proven by circumstantial evidence?", "answer": "Yes, although a conspiracy cannot be based upon mere suspicion or conjecture, conspiracy can be proven by circumstantial evidence (i.e. evidence showing the relationship, conduct or circumstances of the parties, and the overt acts on the part of the co-conspirators to infer that a wrongful alliance has in fact been formed), and such circumstantial evidence is sufficient to allow the conspiracy case to get to a jury. For example, in a trial involving a conspiracy by travel companions to smuggle drugs, direct evidence is not required and mere circumstantial evidence is sufficient to defeat a defense motion for acquittal based on insufficiency of evidence. Thus, a co-defendant's statement \"I said to my travel companion there were too many police here\" can be used to prove the element of agreement."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "In a trial involving a conspiracy by travel companions to smuggle drugs, is direct evidence required to defeat a defense motion for acquittal based on insufficiency of evidence?", "answer": "No, direct evidence is not required and mere circumstantial evidence is sufficient to defeat a defense motion for acquittal based on insufficiency of evidence. Thus, a co-defendant's statement 'I said to my travel companion there were too many police here' can be used to prove the element of agreement."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a drug dealer be convicted of conspiring to distribute drugs if the seller was an undercover officer under the common law unilateral approach to conspiracy?", "answer": "No, under the common law unilateral approach to conspiracy, a drug dealer cannot be convicted of conspiring to distribute drugs if the seller was an undercover officer because there was no plurality of agreement."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant be found guilty of conspiracy if the co-defendant's conspiracy charge is dismissed under the Model Penal Code?", "answer": "Yes, under the Model Penal Code, a defendant can be found guilty of conspiracy even if the co-defendant's conspiracy charge is dismissed."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is talk enough to be guilty of attempted possession of drugs in a common-law jurisdiction?", "answer": "No. In a common-law jurisdiction, a defendant is guilty of attempted possession of drugs only if he took sufficient steps towards the commission of the crime. Talk is not enough."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is a conspiracy presumed to exist?", "answer": "A conspiracy is presumed to exist until there has been an affirmative showing that it has terminated. A co-conspirator does not need to be present at the commission of each crime, nor does the arrest of one co-conspirator automatically terminate the conspiracy if the remaining conspirators continue to carry out the goals of the conspiracy."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant who solicits a person to commit a crime be found guilty of solicitation if the defendant later changes his mind and calls off the crime?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant who solicits a person to commit a crime will be found guilty of solicitation even if the defendant later changes his mind and calls off the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person convicted of statutory rape also be convicted of conspiracy to commit statutory rape?", "answer": "No. A person convicted of statutory rape cannot also be convicted of conspiracy to commit statutory rape because the victim is a protected class and therefore not a co-conspirator."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must be shown to be found guilty of conspiracy?", "answer": "To be found guilty of conspiracy, the conspirators must be shown to have agreed to commit a crime and each of the conspirators must be shown to have had at least the mental state required for the object crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a party that feigns agreement to conspire be prosecuted for conspiracy under common law?", "answer": "No, under the common law, a party that feigns his agreement to conspire cannot be prosecuted for conspiracy since there is no agreement, and therefore no conspiracy."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are conspirators criminally liable for the acts of all conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy?", "answer": "Yes, each conspirator is criminally liable for the acts of all conspirators in furtherance, and within the scope of the conspiracy."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is an argument for acquittal of conspiracy to commit burglary?", "answer": "An argument for acquittal of conspiracy to commit burglary is that you did not intend to commit burglary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "In a prosecution for attempted murder, if you try to kill A but shoot at B thinking it is A, but you hurt C instead. Who is the victim?", "answer": "The only victim is B. Attempted murder focuses on the intent to kill a specific individual and the action taken towards that individual. B was the target of the mistaken identity, making B the relevant victim for the attempted murder charge."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are you guilty of conspiracy to commit larceny if you did not intend to steal?", "answer": "No, you are not guilty of conspiracy to commit larceny if you did not intend to steal."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person be found guilty of conspiracy if they merely have knowledge of the unlawful act?", "answer": "No. A person cannot be found guilty of conspiracy unless they helped to plan, participate, or assist in the unlawful act. Mere knowledge is insufficient."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must the solicitor intend to be guilty of solicitation?", "answer": "To be guilty of solicitation, the solicitor must intend that a criminal offense be committed. For example, a defendant can't be guilty of solicitation of murder if he gives someone a gun knowing the gun is unloaded."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a co-conspirator withdraws from the conspiracy and informs her co-conspirators of the withdrawal, is he guilty of the substantive crimes committed by the conspirators after the withdrawal?", "answer": "No, he is not guilty of the substantive crimes committed by the conspirators after the withdrawal, but is guilty of the conspiracy crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a co-conspirator guilty of substantive crimes committed by conspirators after the co-conspirator withdraws from the conspiracy and informs her co-conspirators of the withdrawal?", "answer": "No. The co-conspirator is not guilty of the substantive crimes committed by the conspirators after the withdrawal but is guilty of the conspiracy crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What constitutes solicitation?", "answer": "Solicitation occurs when the defendant, with the intent that another person commit a crime, entices, advises, incites, orders, or otherwise seeks a specific other person to commit a crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the requirements for the crime of attempted murder at common law?", "answer": "At common law, the crime of attempted murder requires both a specific intent by the actor to kill the victim and an act that puts the defendant in close proximity to completing the crime. (For the Model Penal Code, it must be a 'substantial step' rather than close proximity)."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the crime of solicitation merge into attempt?", "answer": "Yes. The crime of solicitation merges into attempt."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it unlawful if you conspire to rob your own house?", "answer": "No, it is not unlawful if you conspire to rob your own house."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the elements of a conspiracy?", "answer": "A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more parties to commit a crime that requires: (1) an agreement (which does not have to be expressed); AND (2) an intent to agree; AND (3) an intent to pursue or achieve an unlawful objective."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is presumed if a statute defines a crime involving more than one participant but provides for the liability of only one participant?", "answer": "It is presumed that the legislative intent was to immunize the other person from liability as an accomplice."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required for an attempt to commit a crime?", "answer": "An attempt requires the specific intent to commit the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A man having an affair with a married woman deletes an email from her phone that warned her that her husband just discovered the affair and was going to murder her when she came home. The woman goes home and her husband murders her. Can the man be found guilty of murder as an accomplice?", "answer": "Yes. The man may be found guilty of murder as an accomplice because even if he did not aid in the actual murder itself, he intended to aid in the murder, and his assistance facilitated the result."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is an accomplice liable for?", "answer": "An accomplice is liable for all the crimes that the principal committed and all other crimes that were a probable or foreseeable result if the accomplice aids, abets, or facilitates the commission of a crime committed by the principal with the intent that the crime be committed."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant drives others to a bank unaware they plan to rob it. The defendant drives them home after they come running out of the bank with bags of money as the alarm sounds. Is the defendant subject to accomplice liability?", "answer": "No. The defendant is not subject to accomplice liability because he didn't specifically intend to facilitate the commission of the crime at the moment of its inception. BUT the defendant would be viewed as an accessory after the fact for driving the robbers from the scene of the robbery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must be shown for a person to be liable as an accomplice to the crime of another?", "answer": "One must aid, abet, or encourage the perpetrator with the intent thereby to promote or facilitate the commission of the crime, and a conviction for accomplice liability requires proof that the accomplice acted with a culpable mental state."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant keeps a watch knowing that it had just been stolen from someone else. Can he be found guilty of receiving stolen property?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can be found guilty of receiving stolen property if he keeps a watch knowing that it had just been stolen from someone else."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the elements of the crime of receiving stolen property?", "answer": "The crime of receiving stolen property requires that a defendant receives, conceals, or withholds stolen personal property that he knows was obtained by another person in a manner constituting a criminal offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A landlord rents a room in his building to a defendant who uses the room to run a call center for prostitutes. The landlord is charged as an accomplice under a statute that reads, 'It is a felony to maintain a house or place of prostitution.' Is the landlord liable if he charged the defendant substantially higher rent than other law-abiding tenants?", "answer": "Yes, because accomplice liability attaches when a person actively assists or encourages another to commit a crime with a specific intent to aid that crime and having a personal stake in the success of a crime or charging more money demonstrates intent to aid in the criminal venture."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is an accomplice?", "answer": "An accomplice is a person who urges the commission of a crime or knowingly helps others plan, execute, profit from, or escape capture after a crime. A person who gains an unusual profit from a criminal enterprise can be found guilty of accomplice liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A sister provides her brother with a bolt cutter with the specific intent of aiding him in breaking into a store to steal computers. The brother instead uses a crowbar to gain entry. Is the sister guilty as an accomplice?", "answer": "Yes. The sister is guilty as an accomplice of both burglary and larceny since she provided assistance or encouragement with the specific intent of aiding the crime and the actual means of gaining entry is irrelevant."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What constitutes accomplice liability?", "answer": "A person is liable as an accomplice if he intentionally gives assistance or encouragement to facilitate the commission of a crime with the specific intent that the crime be committed."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a getaway driver for a bank robber liable for an unintended murder by the bank robber during the robbery?", "answer": "Yes. The getaway driver will be liable for an unintended murder by the bank robber during the robbery even if the getaway driver made the robber promise not to use his gun."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required for a co-conspirator to be liable for murder in a common law jurisdiction?", "answer": "A co-conspirator is liable for the murder of a victim by a fellow co-conspirator, even if the killing is unintended."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is mere presence at the scene of a crime sufficient for accomplice liability?", "answer": "No, mere presence at the scene of a crime is insufficient to make a person an accomplice; an affirmative act is necessary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required for a defendant to be found guilty of being an accessory?", "answer": "The defendant must have intended to aid and abet the commission of the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are words of encouragement sufficient for accomplice liability?", "answer": "Yes, words of encouragement coupled with criminal intent will suffice for accomplice liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a criminal statute require that only one participant in a criminal transaction is punished?", "answer": "Yes. A criminal statute can require that only one participant in the criminal transaction is punished, such as an exception to aider and abettor liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is passive behavior sufficient for accomplice liability?", "answer": "No, passive behavior, such as mere presence or continuous presence, without evidence of an affirmative act to instigate, incite, embolden, or help others in committing a crime, is not accomplice liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is mere presence, coupled with silent approval and intent, sufficient for accomplice liability?", "answer": "No, mere presence, coupled with silent approval and intent, is insufficient for accomplice liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of murder as an accessory if the person did not plan to use force and had no idea that the other person was armed?", "answer": "No. A person is not guilty of murder as an accessory if the person did not plan to use force and had no idea that the other person was armed."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person gives an antibiotic when the defendant wanted poison. Is the person an accomplice to any degree of criminal homicide if the victim dies as a result of a reaction to the antibiotic?", "answer": "No. The person is not an accomplice to any degree of criminal homicide because they did not intentionally provide what was requested to commit the crime and lacked the requisite mens rea to assist in the criminal act."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is an accessory after the fact subject to accomplice liability and guilty of the substantive crime?", "answer": "No. Accomplice liability requires participation in the commission of the crime. An accessory after the fact only assists the offender after the crime has been completed, making them guilty of the separate crime of obstruction of justice."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required to be convicted as an accomplice at common law?", "answer": "At common law, to be convicted as an accomplice, a person generally must have given aid, counsel, or encouragement with the intent to aid or encourage the principal in the commission of the crime charged."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a corporation be held vicariously liable for the acts of its agents committed in the scope of their employment, including criminal acts?", "answer": "Yes. A corporation can be held vicariously liable for the acts of its agents committed in the scope of their employment, including criminal acts because the agents are acting within the scope of their duties for the corporation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person moved with another to prevent the other from being convicted of a crime. Can a jury properly find that person guilty of accessory after the fact?", "answer": "Yes. A jury can properly find a person guilty of accessory after the fact if that person moved with another to prevent the other from being convicted of a crime because they took actions to help the other avoid conviction."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant is angry at Victor and goes to Victor's workplace with a gun intending to kill Victor, but his shot misses and kills a police officer standing behind Victor. What is the most serious crime the man may be charged with?", "answer": "The most serious crime the man may be charged with is first-degree murder of the police officer because he had the specific intent to kill Victor, which is transferred to the police officer."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can defenses and mitigating circumstances be transferred under the doctrine of transferred intent?", "answer": "Yes. Defenses and mitigating circumstances may be transferred under the doctrine of transferred intent because they apply to the specific intent that is transferred from the intended target to the actual victim."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does the doctrine of transferred intent apply?", "answer": "The doctrine of transferred intent applies when an individual has the intent to harm one particular individual or object, and in the act of trying to accomplish that harm, another is injured because the intent to harm the original party can be transferred to the party that actually was injured."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant kills his victim upon finding him in bed with his wife. Is it appropriate to instruct the jury on the charges of murder and voluntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Yes. It is appropriate to instruct the jury on the charges of murder and voluntary manslaughter because the defendant acted in the heat of passion and was provoked by a situation that would inflame the passion of a reasonable person."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the standard by which murder and voluntary manslaughter are distinguished?", "answer": "Provocation is the standard by which murder and voluntary manslaughter are distinguished because voluntary manslaughter is murder committed in response to adequate provocation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When can a defendant be found to have acted in the heat of passion?", "answer": "A defendant can be found to have acted in the heat of passion if he was provoked by a situation that would inflame the passion of a reasonable person to such an extent that a reasonable person would act out of passion rather than reason because provocation rulings are very fact-specific."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the intent to cause bodily harm sufficient for a charge of attempted murder?", "answer": "No. The intent to cause bodily harm is not sufficient for a charge of attempted murder because only an intent to cause death meets the requirement for attempted murder under common law."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant's intent was to cause bodily harm which was likely to cause death. Is this sufficient for a charge of attempted murder?", "answer": "No. This is not sufficient for a charge of attempted murder because the intent to accomplish serious bodily harm, which would provide the malice necessary for murder if the victim died, is not sufficient intent for attempted murder if the victim does not die."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does an attempt require?", "answer": "An attempt requires an intent to commit the crime because nothing less than an intention to cause the death will suffice for a charge of attempted murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What intent is required for the crime of common law attempted murder?", "answer": "For the crime of common law attempted murder, nothing less than an intention to cause death will suffice because the defendant's intent must align with the specific result of causing death."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required for an attempt under criminal law?", "answer": "An attempt requires an intent to commit the crime because it demonstrates the defendant's specific intention to achieve the criminal result."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Why is the intent to accomplish serious bodily harm not sufficient for attempted murder if the victim does not die?", "answer": "The intent to accomplish serious bodily harm is not sufficient for attempted murder if the victim does not die because the malice necessary for murder if the victim died is not the same as the specific intent required for attempted murder when the victim survives."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant hits his friend on the head with a hammer in anger because the friend broke the defendant's new laptop over a trivial argument. The friend subsequently dies from the injury. Can the jury properly convict the defendant of common law murder?", "answer": "Yes. The jury can properly convict the defendant of common law murder because the defendant either intended to cause death or serious bodily harm and acted without adequate provocation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does common law murder require?", "answer": "Common law murder requires the presence of the specific intent to cause death or serious bodily harm, and the absence of adequate provocation because these elements distinguish it from other types of homicide."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant hires a hit man to kill someone, and the hit man shoots the person but the person is already dead. What can the defendant be charged with?", "answer": "The most the defendant can be charged with is attempted murder because the victim was already dead at the time of the shooting, meaning no life was taken."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does murder require?", "answer": "Murder requires the taking of a life because it is the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the culpability of a victim who kills an attacker when no longer in fear of being attacked?", "answer": "The victim is guilty of either murder or manslaughter, depending on whether the killing was intentional or done in the heat of passion stemming from the attack because the justification for the killing is no longer present."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant puts an explosive in a house intending to kill his wife, then has a change of heart and tells the police, but the bomb still kills someone else. Is the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is guilty of murder in the first degree because the initial intent to kill and the subsequent act that resulted in death constitute premeditation and deliberation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant intentionally puts poison in someone's drink, killing them. Is the defendant guilty of first degree murder?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is guilty of first degree murder because there is premeditation and intent to kill by using poison."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant kills someone after being hit by them. Can this be voluntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Yes. Killing someone after they hit you may be voluntary manslaughter if a jury could find that being hit constituted adequate provocation because the act was committed in the heat of passion."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person poisons another with the intent to kill, but a heart attack brought on by the poison kills the victim instead. Is the person guilty of criminal homicide (murder)?", "answer": "Yes. The person is guilty of criminal homicide (murder) because the intent to kill was present and the act of poisoning directly caused the victim's death."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required to be guilty of murder?", "answer": "To be guilty of murder, one must unlawfully kill another human being with malice aforethought, which may be (1) intent to kill; (2) intent to inflict great bodily injury; (3) reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (depraved heart); or (4) the intent to commit a felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person is hit in the face with an umbrella. Is this adequate provocation?", "answer": "Yes. Getting hit in the face with an umbrella is adequate provocation because it constitutes a serious battery that can inflame the passion of a reasonable person."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person sees their spouse in bed with another and loses control. Is this adequate provocation?", "answer": "Yes. Seeing your spouse in bed with another person and losing control is adequate provocation because it would inflame the passion of a reasonable person to act out of passion rather than reason."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can adequate provocation reduce murder to voluntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Yes. Adequate provocation can reduce murder to voluntary manslaughter because it shows the defendant acted in the heat of passion rather than with malice aforethought."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are the requirements for provocation for voluntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Provocation for voluntary manslaughter requires: (1) adequate provocation; (2) heat of passion; (3) lack of opportunity for the passion to cool; and (4) a causal connection between the provocation, passion, and the act."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If the basis for provocation is unreasonable, is homicide mitigated to voluntary manslaughter?", "answer": "No. Homicide is not mitigated to voluntary manslaughter if the basis for provocation is unreasonable because the provocation must be adequate to inflame the passion of a reasonable person."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does the consent of a victim excuse, mitigate, or reduce the level of a criminal homicide (murder)?", "answer": "No. The consent of a victim does not excuse, mitigate, or reduce the level of a criminal homicide (murder) because the unlawful taking of life is not justified by the victim's consent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does voluntary manslaughter require?", "answer": "Voluntary manslaughter requires passion or provocation because these elements distinguish it from murder, where malice aforethought is present."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant drinks too much at a party and gets into a drunk driving accident that kills someone. Can the defendant be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter because the culpable mental state of recklessness is satisfied by driving while drunk, and the intoxication contributed significantly to the accident."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the difference between voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Unlike murder and voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter is a homicide that is committed without the intent to kill, but with criminal recklessness or negligence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When may involuntary manslaughter be considered depraved-heart homicide or extreme-indifference murder?", "answer": "Involuntary manslaughter may be considered depraved-heart homicide or extreme-indifference murder if the defendant exhibited aggravated recklessness, such as by having previous drunk driving convictions or accidents."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant causes an accident while speeding which kills a pedestrian. If the defendant is properly charged with the misdemeanor of reckless driving, can the defendant be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter under the misdemeanor-manslaughter doctrine because the intentional commission of the misdemeanor supplies the culpability required to impose homicide liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant causes an accident while speeding, which kills a pedestrian, and is charged with the misdemeanor of reckless driving. Can the defendant be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter under the misdemeanor-manslaughter doctrine?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter under the misdemeanor-manslaughter doctrine because the defendant's intentional commission of the misdemeanor of reckless driving supplies the culpability required to impose homicide liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is involuntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful and unintentional killing of another person without malice resulting from: (1) criminal negligence; (2) misdemeanor manslaughter; or (3) intent to inflict slight injury."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does involuntary manslaughter liability attach under the misdemeanor-manslaughter doctrine?", "answer": "Involuntary manslaughter liability attaches under the misdemeanor-manslaughter doctrine even where the defendant does not act with the degree of recklessness ordinarily required for involuntary manslaughter predicated on criminally negligent behavior because the defendant's intentional commission of a misdemeanor supplies the culpability required to impose homicide liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does involuntary manslaughter liability attach under the misdemeanor-manslaughter doctrine?", "answer": "Involuntary manslaughter liability attaches under the misdemeanor-manslaughter doctrine even where the defendant does not act with the degree of recklessness ordinarily required for involuntary manslaughter predicated on criminally negligent behavior, because the defendant's intentional commission of a misdemeanor supplies the culpability required to impose homicide liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant commits a robbery and the victim has a fatal heart attack from the stress. Is the defendant guilty of murder?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is guilty of murder because the victim's death is the proximate result of the defendant's act of robbery, even if there was no way to know of the victim's heart condition."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "An accidental shooting death occurs during an attempted robbery. Is liability for that death attached to all participants in the felony?", "answer": "Yes. Liability for that death attaches vicariously to all participants in the felony because it is foreseeable that an accidental shooting death may occur when a felon is armed during the course of an attempted felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the felony murder doctrine limited to foreseeable deaths?", "answer": "No. The felony murder doctrine is not limited to foreseeable deaths because as long as the homicide is the direct causal result of the felony, the felony murder rule applies whether or not the death was a natural or probable consequence of the felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does the causation theory for felony murder state?", "answer": "According to the causation theory for felony murder, it is foreseeable that when a felon is armed, an accidental shooting death may occur in the course of an attempted felony, and liability for that death attaches vicariously to all participants in the felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person intentionally fires a gun into a crowded room and someone dies. Can that person be convicted of depraved heart murder under the common law of homicide?", "answer": "Yes. That person can be convicted of depraved heart murder under the common law of homicide because intentionally firing a gun into a crowded room demonstrates a callous or reckless disregard for the value of human life."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "How was murder defined at common law?", "answer": "At common law, murder was defined as the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought because malice aforethought encompasses various types of mens rea including intent to kill, intent to commit grievous bodily injury, depraved heart, and felony murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is a person liable for depraved heart murder?", "answer": "A person is liable for depraved heart murder if he kills someone in a way that demonstrates a callous or reckless disregard for the value of human life because this constitutes a depraved heart."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A CEO of a pharmaceutical company shows a reckless disregard for human life by knowingly selling diluted cancer medicine, and it results in the death of a cancer patient. Is the CEO guilty of murder?", "answer": "Yes. The CEO is guilty of murder because knowingly selling diluted cancer medicine demonstrates a reckless disregard for human life, resulting in the death of a cancer patient."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is murder?", "answer": "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought, which includes a reckless disregard for human life because it demonstrates an extreme indifference to the value of human life."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "An angry employee secretly puts laxative pills into her boss's coffee with the intent to cause discomfort, but the boss dies from a heart attack due to a laxative allergy that the employee was unaware of. Is the employee guilty of murder?", "answer": "No. The employee is not guilty of any degree of murder because she lacked malice aforethought since she did not intend to kill or inflict great bodily injury, nor did she act with extreme indifference or reckless disregard for human life."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does murder require?", "answer": "Murder requires that a killer have acted with malice aforethought, express or implied, because it indicates the presence of intent to kill, intent to inflict great bodily injury, extreme indifference or reckless disregard for human life, or commission of an inherently dangerous felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person indiscriminately fires gunshots above their head while inside an occupied building and a bullet ricochets and kills someone. Is the person guilty of murder?", "answer": "Yes. The person is guilty of murder because firing gunshots in such a manner demonstrates a reckless disregard for the high risk of death or serious bodily harm, constituting depraved heart murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is a defendant guilty of depraved heart murder?", "answer": "A defendant is guilty of depraved heart murder if he intentionally or recklessly disregards what he knows is an extremely high risk of death or serious bodily harm because this constitutes a depraved heart."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A robber shoots warning shots that accidentally kill someone. What is he guilty of?", "answer": "The robber is guilty of common law depraved heart murder because the act of shooting warning shots demonstrates a reckless disregard for human life."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are any co-conspirators found guilty of murder if a robber shoots warning shots that accidentally kill someone?", "answer": "Yes. Any co-conspirators will also be found guilty of murder because they are vicariously liable for the acts committed in furtherance of the robbery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant ties up a victim during a robbery and the victim dies while trying to free himself. What is the defendant guilty of?", "answer": "The defendant is guilty of robbery and murder because the act of tying up the victim during the robbery directly led to the victim's death."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is a defendant guilty of if he kills another person while playing Russian roulette?", "answer": "A defendant who kills another person while playing Russian roulette is guilty of murder in the second degree because of the very high risk of death or serious injury, but he is not guilty of murder in the first degree because the killing was not intentional and premeditated."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant shoots someone intending to only injure them, but they die. What is the defendant guilty of?", "answer": "The defendant is guilty of murder because the intent to inflict grievous bodily injury is sufficient to establish malice aforethought if the victim dies."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is manslaughter likely to be the underlying felony for felony murder when compared against attempted rape as the underlying felony?", "answer": "No. Manslaughter is least likely to be the underlying felony for felony murder when compared against attempted rape as the underlying felony because manslaughter typically does not meet the criteria for felony murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Will a prosecution for felony murder fail if the underlying felony is manslaughter?", "answer": "Yes. A prosecution for felony murder will fail if the underlying felony is manslaughter because manslaughter does not meet the criteria for felony murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Will a prosecution for felony murder succeed if attempted rape was the underlying felony?", "answer": "Yes. A prosecution for felony murder will succeed if attempted rape was the underlying felony because attempted rape meets the criteria for felony murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person be convicted of murder if he is fooling around with a gun shooting near a person and a bullet accidentally hits the person, killing him?", "answer": "Yes. A person can be convicted of murder if he is fooling around with a gun shooting near a person and a bullet accidentally hits the person, killing him because such reckless behavior demonstrates a depraved heart."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of murder if they commit an act highly dangerous to life, without an intent to kill but with disregard of the consequences?", "answer": "Yes. A person is guilty of murder if they commit an act highly dangerous to life, without an intent to kill but with disregard of the consequences because such behavior demonstrates a depraved heart."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of felony murder if the person did not intend to commit the felony that is the underlying crime?", "answer": "No. A person is not guilty of felony murder if the person did not intend to commit the felony that is the underlying crime because intent to commit the underlying felony is necessary for felony murder liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are you guilty of if you accidentally kill someone during a robbery?", "answer": "You are guilty of common law murder if you accidentally kill someone during a robbery because the act of committing the robbery creates a high risk of death or serious injury, satisfying the malice requirement for murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are you guilty of if you fire a gun in the direction of a number of people, and one of them is struck by the bullet and killed?", "answer": "You are guilty of common law murder because firing a gun in the direction of a number of people demonstrates a reckless disregard for human life, satisfying the malice requirement for murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What are you guilty of if your child dies from an illness caused by malnutrition and you wouldn't accept help?", "answer": "You are guilty of involuntary manslaughter if your child dies from an illness caused by malnutrition and you wouldn't accept help because such behavior constitutes criminal negligence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can manslaughter be charged if you kill someone while acting recklessly under an unreasonable apprehension of danger?", "answer": "Yes. Manslaughter can be charged if you kill someone while acting recklessly under an unreasonable apprehension of danger because such behavior demonstrates a lack of intent to kill but constitutes criminal recklessness."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is common law murder?", "answer": "Common law murder is wanton and reckless because it involves an intentional act that demonstrates a disregard for human life."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is murder in the second degree (i.e., extreme recklessness or 'depraved heart' murder)?", "answer": "Murder in the second degree (i.e., extreme recklessness or 'depraved heart' murder) is the willful and wanton disregard of an unreasonable or unjustifiable human risk because it demonstrates a callous indifference to human life."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is involuntary manslaughter?", "answer": "Involuntary manslaughter is criminal or gross negligence manslaughter or misdemeanor manslaughter, which is a killing while committing a malum in se misdemeanor or an unenumerated felony but not a BARRK felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is embezzlement?", "answer": "Embezzlement is the unlawful conversion of property by someone who, while serving in a position of trust, was given possession of the property and who had a clean mind at the time of acquiring possession. The intent for the crime of embezzlement is to fraudulently convert the property to personal use, so a temporary use of the property can be sufficient for embezzlement. The defendant's culpability is measured by the value of the property when the crime was committed, not by its subsequent value."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant picks up a wallet that just fell out of a man's jacket and discovers $20 in cash. The defendant decides to keep the cash and walks away with the wallet. Has the defendant committed larceny?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant has committed larceny under the doctrine of continuing trespass because the defendant intended to steal the lost property and had reason to believe he could find out the owner's identity."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a finder of abandoned property be found guilty of larceny?", "answer": "No. A finder of abandoned property cannot be found guilty of larceny because there is no intent to steal property that is abandoned."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When can a finder of lost or mislaid property be found guilty of larceny?", "answer": "A finder of lost or mislaid property can be found guilty of larceny if: (1) the finder intended to steal the lost/mislaid property; and (2) the finder must know who the owner is or have reason to believe that he can find out the owner's identity."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant, honestly believing that a neighbor has stolen his bike, offers to buy the neighbor's bike if he is allowed to test ride it briefly, but rides the bike to his home and never returns. Is the defendant guilty of obtaining property by false pretenses?", "answer": "No. The defendant is not guilty of obtaining property by false pretenses because he believed that the bike belonged to him, and theft crimes require a specific intent to steal or permanently deprive another of his property."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the crime of obtaining property by false pretenses a specific intent crime?", "answer": "Yes. The crime of obtaining property by false pretenses is a specific intent crime because the defendant must know that his representation is false and he must intend to defraud the owner."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required to support a conviction of theft for obtaining property by false pretenses?", "answer": "To support a conviction of theft for obtaining property by false pretenses, it must be shown that the defendant made a false pretense or representation, that the representation was made with intent to defraud the owner of his property, and that the owner was in fact defrauded in that he parted with his property in reliance upon the representation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant enters a building with the intent to commit a felony. Is this larceny or burglary?", "answer": "This is burglary because it requires the defendant to have the specific intent to carry out a felony at the time of entry, whereas larceny can be committed if the intent to permanently deprive another's possession was formed after taking under the theory of continuing trespass."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does larceny consist of?", "answer": "Larceny consists of a taking and carrying away of tangible personal property of another by trespass, with the intent to permanently deprive the person of her interest in the property. The intent to permanently deprive must exist at the time of the taking, unless the doctrine of continuing trespass applies."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of burglary if he takes back his own property or takes property in the honest but mistaken belief that the property belongs to someone who has authorized him to take it back?", "answer": "No. A person taking back his own property or taking property in the honest but mistaken belief that the property belongs to someone who has authorized him to take it back is not guilty of burglary because there is no intent to steal or commit larceny."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant convinces a salesperson to let him try on jewelry and walks out of the store without returning it. Is this larceny?", "answer": "Yes. This is larceny because the intent to steal is established when the taker's conduct creates a substantial risk of permanent loss."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of larceny if he takes and carries away the personal property of another by trespass, even if the person deprived of the property later gives it to the defendant?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is guilty of larceny if he takes and carries away the personal property of another by trespass because the initial taking was unlawful, regardless of subsequent consent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of common law forgery if he forges a historical document with the intent to defraud?", "answer": "No. A defendant is not guilty of common law forgery if he forges a historical document with the intent to defraud because the false document has no legal significance."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant hides an item in his pocket while in a store, intending to steal it, but then changes his mind and leaves the item in the store. Is the defendant guilty of larceny?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is guilty of larceny because the intent to steal was present at the time of taking, even though he later abandoned the item."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of larceny if he uses an innocent agent to perform the larceny for him?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is guilty of larceny if he uses an innocent agent to perform the larceny for him because the defendant orchestrated the unlawful taking through the agent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is larceny if you take and carry away the personal property of another by trespass and intend to return it, but not within a reasonable time?", "answer": "It is larceny if you take and carry away the personal property of another by trespass and intend to return it, but not within a reasonable time because the intent to return the property within a reasonable time is required to avoid larceny charges."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it larceny if you take and carry away the personal property of another by trespass but intend to return it a day or two later?", "answer": "No. It is not larceny if you take and carry away the personal property of another by trespass but intend to return it a day or two later because the intent to return the property within a reasonable time negates the intent to steal."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is false pretense?", "answer": "False pretense is the acquisition of title from a victim by fraud or misrepresentation of a material past or present fact where the victim is actually deceived by the misrepresentation, even if the victim's belief was unreasonable."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant takes an item from another person with intent to deprive him of it, even if the defendant mistakenly believes that larceny does not include the taking of this particular item. Is the defendant guilty of larceny?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is guilty of larceny because the mistaken belief about the scope of larceny does not negate the intent to deprive the owner of the item."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a pawn shop that sells an item before they are allowed to guilty of embezzlement, even if they give the owner all the proceeds from the sale?", "answer": "Yes. A pawn shop that sells an item before they are allowed to is guilty of embezzlement, even if they give the owner all the proceeds from the sale because they unlawfully converted the property to their use before the authorized time."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is larceny?", "answer": "Larceny is the trespassory taking and carrying away of personal property of another with the intent to steal."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "You steal drugs from someone to destroy the drugs. Is this larceny?", "answer": "Yes. This is larceny because the intent to steal is present even if the motive is to destroy the drugs."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is larceny considered as?", "answer": "Larceny is considered a crime against possession, and contraband may be the object of larceny."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "You steal cocaine from someone. Are you guilty of larceny?", "answer": "Yes. You are guilty of larceny because contraband, such as cocaine, can be the object of larceny."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person obtains possession of property by false promise and then fraudulently converts the property. Is the person guilty of larceny by trick, even if he later returns the property?", "answer": "Yes. The person is guilty of larceny by trick because the fraudulent conversion satisfies the elements of the crime, even if the property is later returned."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of the crime of appropriating government property if the person honestly believed the property had been abandoned?", "answer": "No. A person is not guilty of the crime of appropriating government property if the person honestly believed the property had been abandoned because the honest belief negates the intent to steal."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A person commits burglary and larceny but then has a change of heart and returns the stolen item. Will the person still be found guilty of burglary and larceny?", "answer": "Yes. The person will still be found guilty of burglary and larceny because once all the elements of burglary and larceny are satisfied, a subsequent renunciation has no effect."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a pawn shop that sells an item before they are allowed to guilty of embezzlement?", "answer": "Yes. A pawn shop that sells an item before they are allowed to is guilty of embezzlement because they unlawfully converted the property to their use before the authorized time."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does embezzlement require?", "answer": "Embezzlement requires that the defendant intend to and lawfully take possession of the property in a fiduciary relationship and then fraudulently convert the property, thereby interfering with the owner's rights."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is false pretenses?", "answer": "False pretenses is the crime of obtaining title to property of another by the intentional false statement of facts."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is larceny by trick?", "answer": "Larceny by trick occurs when a defendant obtains property falsely based on an intentional misrepresentation of present or past fact."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is larceny if you intend to deal with the property in a way that involves a substantial risk of loss to the owner?", "answer": "Larceny occurs if you intend to deal with the property in a way that involves a substantial risk of loss to the owner because such intent demonstrates an intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant snatches a purse from the victim so suddenly that the victim can't resist at all. Is this larceny or robbery?", "answer": "This is larceny because the lack of violence distinguishes it from robbery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The defendant snatches a purse from the victim who resists in any way or the defendant uses force to make his escape. Is this larceny or robbery?", "answer": "This is robbery because the use of force distinguishes it from larceny."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What distinguishes robbery from larceny?", "answer": "The line between robbery and larceny is between violence and lack of violence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does robbery consist of?", "answer": "Robbery consists of: (1) the trespassory taking and carrying away; (2) of the personal property of another; (3) from the person in their presence; (4) by the use of force or threat of immediate physical harm; (5) with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant be convicted of robbery if there is no violence or intimidation during the larceny?", "answer": "No. A defendant cannot be convicted of robbery if there is no violence or intimidation during the larceny because robbery requires the use of force or threat of immediate physical harm."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "You take money from a sleeping person while you are carrying a gun. Is this larceny or robbery?", "answer": "This is at most larceny because there is no violence or intimidation during the taking."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant be convicted of both robbery and larceny?", "answer": "No. A defendant cannot be convicted of both robbery and larceny because larceny is a lesser included offense of robbery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it robbery if there is a threat of immediate harm to the victim during a larceny, even if the victim is unsure whether the threat truly exists?", "answer": "Yes. It is robbery if there is a threat of immediate harm to the victim during a larceny, even if the victim is unsure whether the threat truly exists because the presence of the threat satisfies the element of force or intimidation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of robbery if he forcibly takes property from another person because he mistakenly thought it was his property?", "answer": "No. A person is not guilty of robbery if he forcibly takes property from another person because he mistakenly thought it was his property because the mistaken belief negates the intent to steal."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it robbery if you take a wallet from a man who is too drunk to notice?", "answer": "No. It is not robbery if you take a wallet from a man who is too drunk to notice because there is no use of force or intimidation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of robbery if he takes money from a person by threatening that person's companion with violence?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is guilty of robbery if he takes money from a person by threatening that person's companion with violence because the threat of violence satisfies the element of force or intimidation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is a defense to a charge of robbery?", "answer": "A defense to a charge of robbery is that the victim was not placed in fear by the criminal because the element of force or intimidation is not satisfied."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "You take a wallet from someone you accidentally kill. Is this robbery?", "answer": "No. Taking the wallet from someone you accidentally kill is not robbery because you did not take the wallet by means of force or putting the victim in fear."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant is robbing a store and a customer comes in and fires a gun to stop the defendant but kills the clerk, will the defendant be found guilty of felony murder in an agency jurisdiction?", "answer": "No. The defendant will not be found guilty of felony murder in an agency jurisdiction because he is not responsible for the acts of the customer."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant is robbing a store and the clerk faints and hurts his head causing the defendant to run away with no money. Is the defendant guilty of assault?", "answer": "No. The defendant is not guilty of assault because assault is a lesser included charge within robbery, and he is only guilty of attempted robbery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What happens under the doctrine of merger?", "answer": "Under the doctrine of merger, lesser included charges are merged into the more serious offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does common law robbery consist of?", "answer": "At common law, robbery consists of: (1) a taking; (2) of personal property of another; (3) from the other's person or presence; (4) by force or intimidation; and (5) with the intent to permanently deprive him of it."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person be found guilty of burglary if he breaks and enters into a dwelling but does not intend to commit a crime inside the house?", "answer": "No. A person cannot be found guilty of burglary if he breaks and enters into a dwelling but does not intend to commit a crime inside the house because the intent to commit a felony is required for burglary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "To be convicted of burglary, must one intend to commit a felony inside the dwelling house?", "answer": "Yes. To be convicted of burglary, one must intend to commit a felony inside the dwelling house because the intent to commit a felony is a necessary element of burglary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What does common law burglary require?", "answer": "At common law, burglary requires breaking and entering the dwelling house of another, at night, with intent to commit a felony therein."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of burglary if they unlawfully enter a house at night, even by just briefly putting their hand inside a window, with the intent to commit a felony?", "answer": "Yes. A person is guilty of burglary if they unlawfully enter a house at night, even by just briefly putting their hand inside a window, with the intent to commit a felony because the brief entry satisfies the element of breaking and entering."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is a defense to burglary?", "answer": "A defense to burglary is that the store was open to the public because the entry was not unlawful."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is an argument for the acquittal of a charge of burglary?", "answer": "An argument for the acquittal of a charge of burglary is that you reasonably thought you had the owner's permission to go into the house and take the item because the reasonable belief negates the intent to commit a felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is breaking and entering the house of another in the nighttime, with intent to commit a felony, whether the felony is actually committed or not, burglary?", "answer": "Yes. Breaking and entering the house of another in the nighttime, with intent to commit a felony, whether the felony is actually committed or not, is burglary because the intent to commit a felony satisfies the elements of burglary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person be found guilty of burglary if he breaks and enters to commit an act that he mistakenly believes is a crime?", "answer": "No. A person cannot be found guilty of burglary if he breaks and enters to commit an act that he mistakenly believes is a crime because the legal impossibility negates the required intent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can you be found guilty of burglary if you reasonably think you are entering a house you have consent to enter?", "answer": "No. You cannot be found guilty of burglary if you reasonably think you are entering a house you have consent to enter because the reasonable belief negates the intent to commit a felony."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is common law burglary?", "answer": "At common law, burglary is a breaking and entering of the dwelling of another at nighttime with the intent of committing a felony therein."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What satisfies the breaking element for common law burglary?", "answer": "To satisfy the breaking element for common law burglary, the use of force or intimidation to gain entry is considered a breaking."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is fraudulently entering a hotel room at night to steal considered a constructive breaking and therefore burglary?", "answer": "Yes. Fraudulently entering a hotel room at night to steal is considered a constructive breaking and therefore burglary because the entry was obtained by fraud."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "The plaintiff is riding his bike between cars in traffic. The defendant opens his car door to deter the plaintiff's dangerous behavior, but the plaintiff is unable to stop and hits the door with his bike and falls to the pavement, sustaining serious injuries. Is the defendant liable for battery?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is liable for battery because the defendant had the requisite intent to cause the harmful contact and even though the contact was to the bike, the bike is closely enough connected to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is battery?", "answer": "Battery is a voluntary, intentional act that causes a harmful or offensive contact with the plaintiff or with something closely connected to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is the harmful or offensive contact element of battery satisfied?", "answer": "The harmful or offensive contact element of battery is satisfied if the contact would inflict pain or impairment of any body function, or if a reasonable person would regard it as offensive."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it aggravated assault if, while trespassing, you use reasonable force to defend yourself because someone is causing bodily harm to you because you trespassed?", "answer": "No. It is not aggravated assault if, while trespassing, you use reasonable force to defend yourself because someone is causing bodily harm to you because the use of reasonable force in self-defense is justified."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of assault if he hits a person who mistakenly grabs him because the defendant was acting in self-defense?", "answer": "No. A defendant is not guilty of assault if he hits a person who mistakenly grabs him because the defendant was acting in self-defense and lacked the intent to harm."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of assault and battery if he had no control over his arms because of a seizure and accidentally hits a person?", "answer": "No. A person is not guilty of assault and battery if he had no control over his arms because of a seizure and accidentally hits a person because the lack of control negates the voluntary act required for assault and battery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of assault if he did not intend to hit the other person?", "answer": "No. A person is not guilty of assault if he did not intend to hit the other person because the intent to cause harmful or offensive contact is required for assault."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under the Model Penal Code, if a defendant forces his victim to drive a car for a few miles to a remote location and then robs the victim, can the defendant be found guilty of kidnapping?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can be found guilty of kidnapping because under the Model Penal Code, the asportation was sufficient and the restraint was not incidental to the robbery."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of arson and murder if he intentionally drives his car into a gas pump, knowing a person lives above the gas station, and a fire ensues and kills the resident?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is guilty of arson and murder if he intentionally drives his car into a gas pump, knowing a person lives above the gas station, and a fire ensues and kills the resident because the act demonstrates malice and intent to cause harm."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it arson if you maliciously burn a portion of the ceiling in a room?", "answer": "Yes. It is arson if you maliciously burn a portion of the ceiling in a room because any burning of a structure qualifies as arson."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is arson?", "answer": "Arson is the malicious burning of the dwelling of another."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it arson under the common law if you burn a building that has a homeless person sleeping inside?", "answer": "Yes. It is arson under the common law if you burn a building that has a homeless person sleeping inside because the presence of a person elevates the severity of the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant wants to burn down a building, then inadvertently starts a fire, but doesn't put it out because he wants the building to burn, is the defendant guilty of arson?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant is guilty of arson because his failure to extinguish the fire demonstrates intent to cause the burning of the building."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What intent or knowledge is required for common law arson?", "answer": "The defendant must act with the intent or knowledge that the structure will burn, or with reckless disregard of an obvious risk that the structure would burn."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is common law arson?", "answer": "At common law, arson is the malicious burning of the dwelling of another."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant is offered to buy stolen drugs from someone who is an undercover narcotic agent. The defendant meets the agent, checks the drugs, and pays the agent with instructions to deliver the stolen drugs to someone else. Can the defendant be found guilty of attempting to receive stolen property?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant can be found guilty of attempting to receive stolen property because his actions demonstrate a substantial step toward the completion of the crime and corroborate his criminal purpose."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is attempt?", "answer": "A defendant is guilty of attempt if: (1) he had the specific intent to commit a crime; and (2) took an overt act sufficiently beyond mere preparation."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required for an overt act in attempt?", "answer": "Most states and the Model Penal Code require that the overt act be a substantial step toward the completion of the crime that is strongly corroborative of the defendant's criminal purpose."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A foreigner who speaks a rare language is selected for extra screening at the airport due to his nervous appearance. An officer confines him in a small room for five hours in order to find a translator. The man goes into a seizure because his insulin kit was confiscated, and he wildly flails his arms and punches the officer. Can the man be convicted under a statute that states, 'It is a felony to assault a federal officer'?", "answer": "No. The man cannot be convicted under a statute that states, 'It is a felony to assault a federal officer,' because the statute requires proof of a voluntary action by a defendant and a seizure is an instance of involuntary conduct."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If an individual's action is involuntary and caused by circumstances beyond his control, will he be guilty?", "answer": "No. If an individual's action is involuntary and caused by circumstances beyond his control, he will not be guilty because involuntary actions do not satisfy the requirement for criminal liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is an individual criminally responsible for unlawful acts which he commits voluntarily?", "answer": "Yes. An individual is criminally responsible for unlawful acts which he commits voluntarily because voluntary action is required for criminal liability."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person generally be held criminally responsible for failing to warn others of danger, no matter how morally reprehensible?", "answer": "No. Generally, a person cannot be held criminally responsible for failing to warn others of danger, no matter how morally reprehensible because there is typically no legal duty to warn others of danger."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does a crime exist if you systematically deprive your child of food and don't call the doctor, where the child would have died from malnutrition in a few months, but the child's cause of death is cancer?", "answer": "No. No crime exists if you systematically deprive your child of food and don't call the doctor, where the child would have died from malnutrition in a few months, but the child's cause of death is cancer because the causation for the crime is not established."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a corporate officer be held criminally liable for failing to prevent violations of food and drug laws, even if duties were delegated to lower-level personnel?", "answer": "Yes. A corporate officer can be held criminally liable for failing to prevent violations of food and drug laws because strict liability applies, even if duties were delegated to lower-level personnel."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can legislatures enact strict liability criminal offenses in areas relating to public welfare and safety regulations?", "answer": "Yes. Legislatures can enact strict liability criminal offenses in areas relating to public welfare and safety regulations because such crimes do not require a mens rea, and people involved in these areas should be on notice of the likelihood that such regulation exists."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A co-conspirator never intended to carry out the unlawful scheme agreed upon. Can he be prosecuted for conspiracy?", "answer": "No. He cannot be prosecuted for conspiracy because he lacks the requisite intent to commit a crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person be held liable for conspiracy if they lack a corrupt or wrongful intent?", "answer": "No. A person cannot be held liable for conspiracy if they lack a corrupt or wrongful intent because the requisite intent to commit a crime is absent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A man breaks into his fianc\u00e9e's house at night to retrieve an engagement ring because she broke off the engagement. Is his best defense against a charge of burglary that he believed he legally owned the ring?", "answer": "Yes. His best defense is that he believed he legally owned the ring because this belief negates the specific intent required for burglary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is any mistake of fact a defense to a specific intent crime?", "answer": "Yes. Any mistake of fact, whether reasonable or unreasonable, is a defense to a specific intent crime because it negates the specific intent required for the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a store clerk and the store owner be convicted under a state law that makes selling alcohol to someone under 21 a misdemeanor, if the clerk sells a bottle of wine to a 19-year-old with a fake ID?", "answer": "Yes. Both the store clerk and the store owner can be convicted because selling alcohol to a minor is a strict liability offense requiring no mens rea, and the statute imposes strict liability on the clerk and vicarious liability on the owner."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can instructions or training to employees be a defense to vicarious liability in strict liability offenses?", "answer": "No. Instructions or training to employees is not a defense to vicarious liability in strict liability offenses because the statute imposes strict liability regardless of such measures."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant is charged with aggravated robbery against an elderly person over 65 years of age, and the necessary mental state for the crime is recklessness. Can the jury properly convict the defendant if he robbed a grey-haired man outside a senior citizens center?", "answer": "Yes. The jury can properly convict the defendant because under the totality of circumstances, the defendant disregarded a substantial and unjustified risk that the victim was over age 65, satisfying the mental state of recklessness."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant is charged with aggravated robbery against an elderly person over 65 years of age. The necessary mental state for the crime is recklessness. If the defendant robbed a grey-haired man outside a senior citizens center, can the jury properly convict the defendant?", "answer": "Yes. The jury can properly convict the defendant because under the totality of circumstances, the defendant disregarded a substantial and unjustified risk that the victim was over age 65, satisfying the recklessness requirement."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If no mens rea is provided in a crime, what must it be at least?", "answer": "If no mens rea is provided, it must be at least recklessness because it ensures fairness and accountability for one's actions."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is every crime presumed to have an accompanying mens rea under both the common law and Model Penal Code?", "answer": "Yes. Every crime is presumed to have an accompanying mens rea under both the common law and Model Penal Code because it would be unfair to punish a person for acts they did not intend or have some reason to know about."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Must the prosecution show that there was a high probability the defendant deliberately attempted to avoid knowledge?", "answer": "Yes. The prosecution must show that there was a high probability the defendant deliberately attempted to avoid knowledge because this establishes the defendant's 'knowing' engagement in the offense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required to 'knowingly' engage in an offense?", "answer": "To 'knowingly' engage in an offense, the defendant must be aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result, and he must have actual knowledge of the attendant circumstances unless he willfully shut his eyes to avoid knowing."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant kills another person thinking he was firing a stage prop instead of a real gun. If the jury believes the defendant and finds the belief reasonable, can the defendant be found guilty of murder or manslaughter?", "answer": "No. The defendant cannot be found guilty of murder or manslaughter because his reasonable belief negates the required mens rea for these crimes."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of attempt if he knew the substance was not illegal?", "answer": "No. A person is not guilty of attempt if he knew the substance was not illegal because he lacked the intent to commit the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a person guilty of attempting to sell a drug if he believed the substance was illegal, even though it was harmless?", "answer": "Yes. A person is guilty of attempting to sell a drug if he believed the substance was illegal because his intent to sell an illegal substance satisfies the requirement for attempt."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Do you have to have the mental state needed for attempt, even if the underlying crime is a strict liability offense?", "answer": "Yes. You have to have the mental state needed for attempt, even if the underlying crime is a strict liability offense because attempt requires a specific intent to commit the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant engages in conduct that he believes is forbidden by a statute, but the statute has been repealed, has he committed a crime?", "answer": "No. The defendant has not committed a crime, not even attempt, because the conduct is no longer prohibited by law."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of an intent crime if it can be shown he had the necessary state of mind?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is guilty of an intent crime if it can be shown he had the necessary state of mind because the requisite mens rea is established."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is an argument for the acquittal of burglary?", "answer": "An argument for the acquittal of burglary is that there was no intent to commit a felony because intent is a necessary element of burglary."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a statute makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly fail to file a report, should a defendant be found not guilty if a jury believes he did not know?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant should be found not guilty because he lacked the necessary mental state required by the statute."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a statute makes it a crime to knowingly make a false statement, should a defendant be found not guilty if a jury believes he did not know it was false?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant should be found not guilty because he lacked the necessary mental state to commit the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a state statute making the sale of adulterated food a crime likely a strict liability offense?", "answer": "Yes. A state statute making the sale of adulterated food a crime is likely a strict liability offense because it aims to protect public welfare and does not require mens rea."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Does vicarious liability pose a due process or other constitutional issue where the principal has control over the agent's conduct?", "answer": "No. Vicarious liability does not pose a due process or other constitutional issue where the principal has control over the agent's conduct because the principal is responsible for the acts performed within the scope of the agency."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If it is a strict liability crime to employ persons under the age of 18 in a liquor store, can both the store manager and store owner be held criminally liable if the manager hires a minor?", "answer": "Yes. Both the store manager and store owner can be held criminally liable because the owner can be held responsible for the criminal acts the manager performed within the scope of his agency."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant does something thinking it's a crime, but it isn't, can he be charged with attempt?", "answer": "No. He cannot be charged with attempt because legal impossibility negates the requisite intent to commit a crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is factual impossibility a defense to attempt?", "answer": "No. Factual impossibility is not a defense to attempt because the defendant's intent and actions were directed toward committing a crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is legal impossibility a defense to attempt?", "answer": "Yes. Legal impossibility is a defense to attempt because the defendant's actions, even if completed, would not constitute a crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it necessary to show intent to injure or kill to satisfy the mens rea of malice?", "answer": "No. It is not necessary to show intent to injure or kill to satisfy the mens rea of malice because recklessness is sufficient."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must the prosecution show to satisfy the mens rea of malice?", "answer": "The prosecution must show that the defendant was reckless because this satisfies the mens rea of malice."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does a person act 'knowingly'?", "answer": "A person acts 'knowingly' when he knows his conduct will necessarily or very likely cause such a result because this awareness meets the requirement for 'knowing' conduct."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a mistake of law an excuse to larceny?", "answer": "No. A mistake of law is no excuse to larceny because ignorance of the law is not a defense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is a mistake of fact a valid defense to general intent crimes such as rape, battery, kidnapping, and false imprisonment?", "answer": "Yes. A mistake of fact is a valid defense to general intent crimes if it is honestly entertained, based upon reasonable grounds, and would make the conduct lawful if the facts were as supposed."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is required for a mistake of fact to be a valid defense to a general intent crime?", "answer": "A mistake of fact must be honestly entertained, be based upon reasonable grounds, and be of such a nature that the conduct would have been lawful and proper if the facts had been as they were reasonably supposed to be."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a defendant who formed an intent to commit a crime and then drinks in order to work up his nerve to commit it rely on the defense of voluntary intoxication?", "answer": "No. A defendant cannot rely on the defense of voluntary intoxication because the intoxication was used to strengthen the intent to commit the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a man intends to commit a murder and then drinks to strengthen his nerve, can he use subsequent intoxication to negate the specific intent required for murder?", "answer": "No. He cannot use subsequent intoxication to negate the specific intent required for murder because the intent was formed prior to the intoxication."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A woman enters a child's home at night after several hours of stalking and waiting, and strangles the child to death with a belt. If an expert witness determines that the woman knew that killing was illegal and wrong, but that she suffered from a serious mental illness that left her in the grip of a powerful and irresistible compulsion to kill the victim, how should the jury find if the jurisdiction follows the Model Penal Code test?", "answer": "The jury can properly acquit the woman of murder if the jurisdiction follows the Model Penal Code test because her mental illness left her unable to conform her conduct to the law."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a jury believes a woman understood that killing was wrong when she killed a child, but she suffered from a serious mental illness that left her with an irresistible compulsion to kill, how should the jury find if the jurisdiction follows the M'Naghten test?", "answer": "The woman will be found guilty under the M'Naghten test because she understood that killing was wrong when she killed the child."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under the ALI Model Penal Code test, when must a criminal defendant be found not guilty by reason of insanity?", "answer": "A criminal defendant must be found not guilty by reason of insanity if he is diagnosed with a relevant mental defect and at the time of the incident was unable to either appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of the law."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under the M'Naghten test, when is a person not guilty by reason of insanity?", "answer": "A person is not guilty by reason of insanity if, at the time of the act, due to a defect of reason from disease of mind, the actor did not know the nature and quality of the act, or did not know that what he was doing was wrong."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "A defendant baseball player hits a spectator with his bat after being taunted. What is a good argument to support a jury instruction for the defense of involuntary intoxication?", "answer": "A good argument is that his coach, lying that it was a vitamin, gave him cocaine instead because involuntary intoxication occurs without knowledge that the substance is intoxicating."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When does involuntary intoxication occur?", "answer": "Involuntary intoxication occurs when one ingests an intoxicating substance without knowledge that the substance is intoxicating, under duress, or pursuant to medical advice."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is second degree murder if intoxication generally does not reduce it down to manslaughter?", "answer": "Second degree murder is killing another person in a drunken rage because intoxication does not generally reduce the charge to manslaughter."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is evidence of voluntary intoxication admissible under the common law to negate the intent required for either assault or attempted murder?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence of voluntary intoxication is admissible under the common law to negate the intent required for either assault or attempted murder because it can show the defendant was incapable of forming the specific intent."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is the defendant's insane delusion that the only way to prevent his wife from destroying the world was to kill her a defense to murder under the insanity defense?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant's insane delusion is a defense to murder under the insanity defense because it negates the requisite mens rea for the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can the defendant's insane delusions brought on by intoxication be a defense to murder if he killed because voices told him to kill?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant's insane delusions brought on by intoxication can be a defense to murder because they negate the requisite mens rea for the crime."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under the M'Naghten test of insanity, what must the defendant not know?", "answer": "The defendant must not know that his act was morally wrong because this lack of knowledge satisfies the test for insanity."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can intoxication be a defense to burglary?", "answer": "Yes, intoxication may be a defense to burglary if the defendant did not form an intent to commit the crime because he was drunk."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is intoxication a defense to reckless conduct?", "answer": "No, intoxication is not a defense to reckless conduct, but it may be asserted to show the defendant was too intoxicated to realize he was creating a substantial and unjustifiable risk."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can intoxication be a defense to a crime that requires intent?", "answer": "Yes, intoxication may be a defense to a crime that requires intent if the defendant could not form an intent to commit the crime because he was drunk."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the best defense for a defendant who kills someone because he delusionally thinks that the other person was attacking and voices in his head told him to kill that person?", "answer": "Insanity is the best defense for a defendant who kills someone under such delusions."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the best defense for a person who kills someone else because he delusionally thinks that the other person was going to kill others?", "answer": "Insanity is the best defense for a person who kills someone under such delusions."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is evidence of intoxication admissible in defense of reckless crimes?", "answer": "Generally, evidence of intoxication in defense of reckless crimes should be inadmissible because a person who creates such a risk but is unaware of the risk solely because of voluntary intoxication is acting recklessly."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is it constitutional to eliminate the insanity defense or require the defendant to prove insanity by a preponderance of evidence?", "answer": "Yes, it is constitutional to eliminate the insanity defense or to require the defendant to prove insanity by a preponderance of evidence."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is voluntary intoxication a defense to strict liability crimes?", "answer": "No, voluntary intoxication is no defense to strict liability crimes. No defense that negates intent is permitted for strict liability crimes."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Is voluntary intoxication a defense to crimes involving recklessness?", "answer": "No, voluntary intoxication is NOT a defense to crimes involving recklessness."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can voluntary intoxication reduce a murder charge?", "answer": "Voluntary intoxication will never reduce murder to manslaughter, but it may reduce a First Degree Murder charge to Second Degree Murder if it negates the defendant's premeditation, deliberation, or intent to kill."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant starts a rumor that ruins a victim's career and the victim ultimately commits suicide, what is a defense to a manslaughter charge?", "answer": "The defendant did not commit an act that proximately caused the victim's death."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the guilt of a person who obtains poison to kill someone if the victim dies, even if what was given to the victim wasn't deadly but the victim died from it anyway?", "answer": "The person is guilty of murder."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can you be found guilty of murder if you mistreat a person but their death is the result of something else?", "answer": "No, you cannot be found guilty of murder if you did not cause the death."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a defendant sees someone trying to take his laptop from his car and he shoots him with a gun, does the defendant have a defense to his actions?", "answer": "No. The defendant has no defense to his actions because he used excessive force."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When may a person use reasonable non-deadly force to prevent a tort against his or her property?", "answer": "A person may use reasonable non-deadly force to prevent a tort against his or her property so long as (1) a request to stop is made before the use of force, unless the request would be futile or expose the defender to danger; and (2) force can only be used to prevent the tort against the property, and once the tort is committed, force can no longer be used."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a justification defense be valid to a charge of gun possession if the defendant took possession of the gun to prevent an intoxicated friend from harming herself or others?", "answer": "Yes. A justification defense may be valid in such a case."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What must a defendant show to succeed with a justification defense?", "answer": "The defendant must show that he had no reasonable, legal alternative to violating the law to avoid an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can the jury take into account circumstances, physicality, and past experiences when determining the reasonableness of the fear in a self-defense case?", "answer": "Yes. The jury can take into account such things as the circumstances, the physicality, and past experiences."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is a person justified in using deadly force to protect himself?", "answer": "A person is justified in using deadly force to protect himself if he has an honest and reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death from an unlawful and immediate threat. The honesty of the belief is subjective while the reasonableness of the fear is objective."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If a man, intending to kill his wife, provokes her by claiming he is having an affair with her sister, and then he kills his wife with a gun when she charges at him with a knife, will he be guilty of first degree murder?", "answer": "Yes, he will be guilty of first degree murder since his killing was willful with premeditation and deliberation, and the defense of self-defense is not available because he purposely provoked another to violence in order to kill the victim in self-defense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "When is the right to claim self-defense lost?", "answer": "The right to claim self-defense is lost where an actor provokes the victim's use of force purposely in order to kill the victim in self-defense."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What is the obligation of a defender in a jurisdiction that follows the retreat doctrine before resorting to non-deadly force?", "answer": "A defender has no obligation to retreat prior to resorting to non-deadly force."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Can a person who reasonably believes deadly force is about to be used against him use deadly force to act in self-defense without a duty to retreat?", "answer": "Yes. A person may use deadly force to act in self-defense and has no duty to retreat."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What force can be used in self-defense when attacked, and is there a duty to retreat?", "answer": "You can use reasonable force when attacked, and there is no duty to retreat. There is no crime if the reasonable force kills the person."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Are you guilty of murder if you kill a person that attacked you with a deadly weapon?", "answer": "No, you are not guilty of murder if you kill a person that attacked you with a deadly weapon."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "What force is a person entitled to use to prevent any threatened harmful or offensive bodily contact?", "answer": "A person is entitled to use reasonable force to prevent any threatened harmful or offensive bodily contact."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "If you act in self-defense and use non-deadly force, are you guilty of a crime if the aggressor dies?", "answer": "No, you are not guilty of a crime even if the aggressor dies."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under common law majority rule, when may deadly force be used, and is there a need to retreat?", "answer": "Deadly force may be used when a person reasonably believes deadly force is about to be used against him, and there is no need to retreat."}
{"topic": "Criminal Law & Procedure", "question": "Under the Human Shield Exception, what is the felon guilty of if the victim is killed by the police or someone else while being used as a human shield?", "answer": "The felon is guilty of felony murder."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When can a witness's character for truthfulness be rehabilitated?", "answer": "A witness's character for truthfulness can be rehabilitated after it has been attacked, through reputation or opinion testimony about the witness's good character for truthfulness."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are prior statements of identification admissible for substantive purposes?", "answer": "Yes. Prior statements of identification are admissible for substantive purposes if the declarant is testifying at trial and is subject to cross-examination."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When is evidence of a prior conviction inadmissible for impeachment?", "answer": "Evidence of a prior conviction is generally inadmissible for impeachment if more than 10 years have elapsed since the date of the conviction or the release of the witness from confinement, whichever is the later date."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When is evidence relevant to some issue at trial admissible?", "answer": "Evidence that is relevant to some issue at trial other than the defendant's character is admissible if its probative value is not substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A witness testifies that the plaintiff was going 55 mph. The defense calls another witness to testify that the first witness told her the plaintiff was going 75 mph. Is this testimony admissible?", "answer": "Yes. This statement is admissible to impeach the first witness as a prior inconsistent statement."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is the most common method of impeachment?", "answer": "The most common method of impeachment is the use of a prior inconsistent statement, action, or omission to show that the witness has made contradictory statements."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When are religious beliefs inadmissible to attack or support a witness's credibility?", "answer": "Religious beliefs are inadmissible to attack or support a witness's credibility, but they can be admitted when relevant to other matters, such as bias, damages, or motive."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When is a prior inconsistent statement admissible as substantive evidence?", "answer": "A prior inconsistent statement is admissible as substantive evidence if it was given under oath as part of a formal trial, hearing, or deposition."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A defendant in a criminal trial for embezzlement calls a witness who testifies to the defendant's reputation for honesty. The prosecution asks, 'Did you hear that three years ago he was arrested for forgery?' Is this question permissible?", "answer": "Yes. The prosecution is allowed to inquire into relevant bad acts to test the witness's knowledge of the defendant's reputation."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a character witness be cross-examined about specific acts committed by the person they are testifying about?", "answer": "Yes. When a character witness is cross-examined, the court may allow inquiries into specific acts committed by the person about whom the witness is testifying."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A defendant in a criminal trial calls his wife to testify that she, and not the defendant, burned down the neighbor's house. Can the prosecutor ask on cross-examination about scars on the wife's arms caused by the defendant?", "answer": "Yes. The question explores the wife's possible motive to give false testimony and is allowed to impeach her truthfulness."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When can a court restrict cross-examination into the motives or bias of a witness?", "answer": "A court may restrict cross-examination into the motives or bias of a witness as long as the cross-examiner has an adequate opportunity to explore the witness's motives and biases, and the cross-examination elicits adequate information to allow a jury to assess the witness's credibility."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A police officer testifies, 'The defendant is robbing a gas station! Stop him,' and this statement is admitted under the excited utterance hearsay exception. Later, the same woman who made this statement is unavailable to testify but had previously said to her sister, 'I wanted to punish the defendant for cheating on you, but I made a mistake.' Is this prior inconsistent statement admissible to impeach her credibility?", "answer": "Yes. The prior inconsistent statement is admissible to impeach her credibility even though the woman is unavailable to testify because a hearsay declarant may be impeached with a prior inconsistent statement without being given a fair opportunity to explain or deny the prior inconsistent statement."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a prior inconsistent statement admissible as substantive evidence if the witness is unavailable?", "answer": "No. A prior inconsistent statement is not admissible as substantive evidence if the witness is unavailable unless the statement was made under oath at a prior hearing, trial, or deposition. It is always admissible for impeachment purposes."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a trial for battery on his wife, the defendant testifies that he was in a loving relationship and would never hurt his wife. Can this testimony be impeached by a neighbor's testimony that he saw the defendant choke his wife 4 years ago?", "answer": "Yes. This is a proper contradiction and is admissible for impeachment because it directly contradicts the defendant's testimony on a non-collateral matter."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence that directly contradicts a previous witness on a non-collateral matter admissible for impeachment?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence that directly contradicts the previous witness on a non-collateral matter, demonstrating that some particular part of what a witness has testified is false, is admissible as an impeachment by contradiction."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a negligence suit against an amusement park, a bystander's statement shortly before the accident that 'a crazy boy is standing up in the roller coaster' is introduced to prove the plaintiff's contributory negligence. Is this statement admissible substantively?", "answer": "Yes. This statement is admissible substantively because it falls under the hearsay exceptions of present sense impression and excited utterance."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a prior inconsistent statement admissible only for impeachment?", "answer": "Yes. A prior inconsistent statement is admissible only to impeach unless the statement meets the conditions of another hearsay exception."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can the credibility of a hearsay declarant be attacked by any evidence that would be admissible if the declarant had testified as a witness?", "answer": "Yes. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, the credibility of the hearsay declarant may be attacked by any evidence that would be admissible if the declarant had testified as a witness, such as evidence of bias or poor perception."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness be cross-examined regarding specific instances of conduct to attack the witness's character for truthfulness?", "answer": "Yes. In a civil trial, a witness can be cross-examined regarding specific instances of conduct to attack the witness's character for truthfulness. Attacking the witness's character for other traits, such as carelessness, is not admissible."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a party call a second witness to impeach their own first witness?", "answer": "Yes. A party can call a second witness to impeach their own first witness, but statements from the first witness to the second witness are admissible only to impeach the first witness and not for the truth of the matter."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can specific instances of a witness's conduct be inquired into on cross-examination?", "answer": "Yes. Specific instances of the conduct of a witness can be inquired into on cross-examination at the discretion of the trial court if it is probative of the truthfulness or untruthfulness of the witness, although such specific instances cannot be proven by extrinsic evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a hearsay statement is admitted into evidence, can the credibility of the declarant be impeached?", "answer": "Yes. If a hearsay statement is admitted into evidence, the credibility of the declarant is subject to impeachment in the same manner as if the declarant was an actual witness."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a plaintiff impeach his own witness's testimony with a tape recording of the witness making statements contrary to the witness's statements made at trial?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff can impeach his own witness's testimony with a tape recording of the witness making statements contrary to the witness's statements made at trial."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can specific instances of the conduct of a witness be proven by extrinsic evidence for the purpose of attacking the witness's credibility?", "answer": "No. Except for conviction of a crime, specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking the witness's credibility, cannot be proven by extrinsic evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is impeachment of a dying declaration by showing a prior inconsistent statement admissible?", "answer": "Yes. Impeachment of a dying declaration by showing a prior inconsistent statement by the declarant is admissible to impeach the dead declarant."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is impeachment on a collateral issue with extrinsic evidence admissible?", "answer": "No. Impeachment on a collateral issue with extrinsic evidence such as the testimony of another witness is inadmissible."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are judgments of felony convictions admissible to prove any fact essential to the judgment in both criminal and civil actions?", "answer": "Yes. Judgments of felony convictions are admissible in both criminal and civil actions to prove any fact essential to the judgment, whether the judgment arose after trial or upon a plea of guilty."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can specific instances of misconduct by a witness be proved by extrinsic evidence for the purpose of attacking the witness's credibility?", "answer": "No. Specific instances of misconduct by a witness, for the purpose of attacking the witness's credibility, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness's testimony be impeached by presenting a second witness who contradicts the first witness?", "answer": "Yes. Even if the testimony is of no consequence to the lawsuit, a witness's testimony may be impeached at the judge's discretion by presenting a second witness who contradicts the first witness, whether or not there was an objection to the first witness's testimony."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are questions regarding the bias of a witness permitted on cross-examination?", "answer": "Yes. Questions regarding the bias of a witness are permitted on cross-examination to prove that the witness is biased in favor of a party, such as if they are friends or relatives."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are a witness's prior inconsistent statements made in a deposition admissible as former testimony under the hearsay exception?", "answer": "Yes. A witness's prior inconsistent statements made in a deposition are admissible as former testimony under the hearsay exception and can be used for impeachment of the witness and as substantive evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is extrinsic evidence that the defendant's primary witness is a partner of the defendant admissible as evidence of possible bias?", "answer": "Yes. Extrinsic evidence that the defendant's primary witness is a partner of the defendant is admissible as evidence of possible bias."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a prior inconsistent statement admissible for impeachment and as substantive evidence?", "answer": "Yes. A prior inconsistent statement is admissible for impeachment and as substantive evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a cross-examiner bring out the fact that the witness has committed prior bad acts?", "answer": "Yes. A cross-examiner is permitted to bring out the fact that the witness has committed prior bad acts, but only prior bad acts that are probative of truthfulness may be asked about."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a judgment against another plaintiff to prove an issue generally admissible?", "answer": "No. A judgment against another plaintiff to prove an issue is generally not admissible."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are beliefs or opinions of witnesses on matters of religion admissible to impair credibility?", "answer": "No. Evidence of beliefs or opinions of witnesses on matters of religion is not admissible to impair credibility."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a party impeach a witness with a prior felony conviction?", "answer": "Yes. A party can impeach a witness with a prior felony conviction by introducing the record of judgment as extrinsic evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Do the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to grand jury proceedings?", "answer": "No. The Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply to grand jury proceedings except with respect to privileges."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Do the Federal Rules of Evidence apply at probation revocation proceedings?", "answer": "No. The Federal Rules of Evidence (except those governing privileges) do not apply at probation revocation proceedings."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is the general rule for determining privileges in federal courts under Rule 501?", "answer": "In federal courts, federal law governs issues of privilege in the absence of a written rule, and the privilege is based on federal common law. For civil cases in federal court involving state law (diversity cases), the court applies the state's law of privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a case will use federal substantive law, what rules for privilege must the court use?", "answer": "The court must use federal common law rules for privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is the primary function of a grand jury?", "answer": "The primary function of a grand jury is to determine probable cause, not guilt, and they may consider hearsay evidence and other evidence that would be otherwise inadmissible at trial."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence of flight admissible?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence of flight is admissible as relevant circumstantial evidence of consciousness of guilt, provided sufficient evidence exists to establish that the defendant fled to avoid prosecution of the charged offense."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What must testimony meet to be admissible as evidence of habit?", "answer": "To be admissible as evidence of habit, the proffered testimony must generally meet the three elements of regularity, specificity, and an involuntary or semiautomatic response."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When are potentially gruesome photographs admissible?", "answer": "Potentially gruesome photographs may be admitted into evidence where the photographs are not so gruesome that their prejudicial potential absolutely requires their exclusion. They are admissible if the photographs offer some evidence of the victim's identity or establish relevant details about the accident and their probative value is not substantially outweighed by their prejudicial effect."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is testimony that a weapon in the defendant's possession was consistent with the victim's wound admissible in a criminal prosecution?", "answer": "Yes. Testimony that the weapon in the defendant's possession was consistent with the victim's wound is admissible even if a number of other weapons could have caused the wound, because the probative value of this evidence is for the jury to assess."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is the standard for admitting evidence in federal courts?", "answer": "Evidence need only have any tendency to make the existence of a fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence of a defendant's intoxication admissible to provide an alternate explanation of an accident's cause?", "answer": "Yes. Testimony of a driver's intoxication is admissible to provide an alternate explanation of the accident's cause and it is not substantially more prejudicial than probative."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When may relevant evidence be excluded?", "answer": "Relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the dangers of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a defendant show due care or the absence of a defect by showing that there have not been similar accidents in the past?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can show due care or the absence of a defect by showing that there have not been similar accidents in the past, so long as the conditions were the same in the past as when the accident occurred and if there were any injuries in the past, they would have been reported to the defendant."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When is evidence considered legally relevant?", "answer": "Evidence is legally relevant if (1) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence and (2) the fact is of consequence in determining the action."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence of drug possession at the time of arrest by a person on trial for robbery admissible?", "answer": "No. Evidence of drug possession at the time of arrest by a person on trial for robbery should be excluded because its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Why should evidence of drug possession at the time of arrest by a person on trial for robbery be excluded?", "answer": "Evidence of drug possession at the time of arrest by a person on trial for robbery should be excluded because its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is extrinsic evidence of a collateral matter admissible?", "answer": "No. Extrinsic evidence of a collateral matter is inadmissible since it does not relate to a material issue in the case."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are color photos of grisly deaths admissible?", "answer": "Usually no. Color photos of grisly deaths are usually inadmissible because they are prejudicial. Color photos of grisly deaths are only admissible when there is no other way to prove the death."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is polygraph evidence admissible?", "answer": "No. Polygraph evidence is inadmissible because it is considered unreliable and potentially confusing to jurors."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are newspapers self-authenticating under the Federal Rules of Evidence?", "answer": "Yes. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, newspapers (along with journals, trade inscriptions and commercial papers) are self-authenticating, meaning their authenticity need not be proved by extrinsic evidence. However, newspaper articles are self-authenticating as to proof of publication, not necessarily proof of authorship or contents, which would likely require additional witness testimony to establish admissibility of the assertions contained within the article."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A police officer testifies, 'That is the gun I took from the defendant. It is a very rare Luger. I've never seen one like it before.' Can this testimony authenticate the gun as evidence?", "answer": "Yes. The officer's testimony can authenticate the gun as evidence because it satisfies the requirement of a witness with first-hand knowledge testifying under oath that the item is what the proponent claims it is."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A police officer testifies, \u201cThat is the gun I took from the defendant. It is a very rare Luger. I've never seen one like it before.\u201d Can this testimony authenticate the gun as evidence?", "answer": "Yes. The officer's testimony can authenticate the gun as evidence because it satisfies the requirement of a witness with first-hand knowledge testifying under oath that the item is what the proponent claims it is."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "The first witness testifies to taking a gun from the defendant at the time of arrest, tagging it, and giving it to the second witness. The second witness testifies to receiving the gun, keeping it secure until trial, and bringing it to court. Can this establish a chain of custody to authenticate the gun as evidence?", "answer": "Yes. This can establish a chain of custody to authenticate the gun as evidence because it traces the item from the real-world event to the courtroom."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is required to authenticate a tangible object?", "answer": "When a party seeks to introduce a tangible object into evidence (for example: document, weapon), the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is. There are two methods of authenticating a tangible object: (1) if the object is unique or has been marked in such a way that it can positively be identified later, the authentication requirement can be satisfied by a witness with first-hand knowledge testifying under oath that the item is what the proponent claims; or (2) authentication can also be accomplished by establishing a chain of custody that traces the item from the real-world event to the courtroom."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness with personal knowledge authenticate a photograph even if they are not the photographer?", "answer": "Yes. A photograph is authenticated for evidentiary purposes by the testimony of a witness with personal knowledge that the photograph accurately depicts what its proponent claims it depicts."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A bag of drugs is offered as evidence. The chain of custody is established from the time it was seized until the trial, and it is sufficiently identified that it remains in an unaltered condition. Can this authenticate the bag of drugs as evidence?", "answer": "Yes. This can authenticate the bag of drugs as evidence because a non-unique object can be authenticated by establishing a chain of custody from the time it was seized until the trial and sufficiently identifying that it remains in an unaltered condition."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a photograph admissible if it is properly authenticated?", "answer": "Yes. If a photograph is properly authenticated, it can be introduced into evidence, although it is the jury's task to make determinations and give weight to the evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is required to authenticate a voice?", "answer": "To authenticate a voice, the proponent of the evidence is required to introduce enough evidence for a reasonable juror to find that the item is what it purports to be, and it is up to the jury to determine how much weight to give the evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a caller's self-identification sufficient to authenticate an incoming telephone call?", "answer": "No. An incoming telephone call in which the caller identifies himself is insufficient to authenticate that the person was the caller. There must be additional evidence that the caller is who he said he was, such as recognition of the voice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness authenticate an outgoing telephone call?", "answer": "Yes. A witness can authenticate an outgoing telephone call by showing that the witness made a call to the number assigned by the phone company to a particular person and the circumstances show that the person who talked on the other end was in fact the person the caller was trying to reach."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a layperson's identification of handwriting be admissible?", "answer": "Yes. A layperson's identification of handwriting is admissible if the layperson had seen the person's handwriting at some time before the litigation began, and that they recognize the signature or handwriting in question to be that of the person."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a statement of prior identification admissible?", "answer": "Yes. A statement of prior identification of a person made after perceiving him is substantively admissible if the declarant testifies at the trial and is available for cross-examination."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When is a photograph admissible?", "answer": "A photograph is admissible if a witness testifies that it fairly and accurately represents what it is claimed to represent."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a vehicle registration admissible without authentication or certification?", "answer": "Yes. A vehicle registration is admissible without authentication or certification to prove the connection between the defendant and ownership of the car."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a prior identification admissible if the declarant does not testify and is not subject to cross-examination?", "answer": "No. A prior identification is only admissible if the declarant testifies and is subject to cross-examination."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice be admitted to prove conduct on a particular occasion?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice, even if the evidence is not corroborated."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is it proper to prove that a person did an act on a particular occasion by showing that they did a similar act on a different, unrelated occasion?", "answer": "No. In both civil and criminal cases, it is improper to prove that a person did an act on a particular occasion by showing that they did a similar act on a different, unrelated occasion. However, evidence of uncharged crimes may be admitted if it helps establish some element of the crime or is otherwise relevant for some purpose besides showing character and if its probative value exceeds its potential for prejudice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Under Rule 404, is evidence of the character of a party in a civil case admissible to establish that the individual acted consistently with that character trait?", "answer": "No, under Rule 404, evidence of the character of a party (who was not also a witness) in a civil case that is offered for the circumstantial purpose of establishing that the individual acted consistently with that character trait is inadmissible, regardless of whether it is offered in the form of opinion, reputation, or specific prior acts."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can specific instances of prior conduct be introduced to show that something was not an accident or mistake?", "answer": "Yes, specific instances of prior conduct can be introduced to show that something was not an accident or mistake. For example, if a young man marries a wealthy older woman who drowns in the bathtub and it is discovered that this has happened with three different women, the prosecution may introduce the prior deaths to prove absence of mistake."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is character evidence generally admissible in civil and criminal actions?", "answer": "No, generally, character evidence is inadmissible in civil and criminal actions. One exception to this rule is that specific instances of prior bad conduct may be admitted to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a character witness testify that he is aware the defendant turned down prior opportunities to steal?", "answer": "No. A character witness cannot testify that he is aware the defendant turned down prior opportunities to steal as specific instances of the defendant's good conduct are not admissible."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a defendant introduce evidence of his good character as inconsistent with the type of crime charged?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant may introduce evidence of his good character as inconsistent with the type of crime charged, but proof of good character offered by the defendant must be in the form of reputation testimony or opinion testimony."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If the defendant is charged with theft, can a witness testify that the defendant has a reputation for being honest?", "answer": "Yes. If the defendant is charged with theft, a witness can testify that the defendant has a reputation for being honest. However, specific instances of the defendant's good conduct are not admissible."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "How may character evidence be offered when it is admissible?", "answer": "When character evidence is admissible, it may be offered through reputation and opinion testimony on defense and through specific instances on cross, unless character is an essential element of the crime or defense, whereby specific instances of good conduct are admissible on defense."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When may character evidence be admissible to prove that a person acted in conformity with their character on a particular occasion?", "answer": "Character evidence may be admissible to prove that a person acted in conformity with their character on a particular occasion when: (1) character is an essential element of the crime; (2) it is offered to show motive, intent, identity, lack of absence/mistake, knowledge, plan or preparation; and (3) under the Mercy Rule where a defendant can offer good character (pertinent character traits) about himself and testimony about the victim's character."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a defendant introduce evidence of pertinent character traits relevant to the case?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is permitted to introduce evidence of pertinent character traits relevant to the case. For example, if the defendant is charged with theft, fraud, or some other offense involving dishonesty, the defendant is permitted to introduce evidence of his honest character, or if the defendant is charged with a violent crime, the defendant can introduce evidence of his peaceful character."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If the defendant is accused of a violent crime such as assault or battery, can the defendant call a witness to testify that the defendant is of good reputation for peacefulness?", "answer": "Yes. If the defendant is accused of a violent crime such as assault or battery, the defendant can call a witness to testify that the defendant is of good reputation for peacefulness. However, the witness cannot testify to the defendant's character for truthfulness unless the defendant's truthfulness was attacked while he was testifying."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a second witness be cross-examined about a first witness's past conduct if the second witness supports the first witness's credibility?", "answer": "Yes. If a second witness supports the credibility of a first witness, the second witness can be cross-examined about knowledge of past conduct by the first witness if there is a good faith basis for believing that the past conduct did occur and if the past conduct would contradict or change the second witness's description of the first witness's reputation for honesty."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a criminal fraud case, are prior convictions for fraud admissible?", "answer": "Yes, in a criminal fraud case, prior convictions for fraud are admissible to both impeach the defendant and to prove that the defendant committed the crime."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In defamation cases, is character evidence regarding the plaintiff's reputation in the community admissible?", "answer": "Yes, in defamation cases, where the plaintiff's character or reputation is considered in issue, character evidence regarding the plaintiff's reputation in the community is admissible to determine injury to reputation."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In an attempted murder trial, is evidence that the defendant once threatened another person with a weapon admissible?", "answer": "No, in an attempted murder trial, evidence that the defendant once threatened another person with a weapon is improper character evidence and therefore inadmissible unless it is used to prove motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "At a murder trial, can a defendant call witnesses to testify that the defendant has a reputation in their community as a peaceable man?", "answer": "Yes, at a murder trial, a defendant can call witnesses to testify that the defendant has a reputation in their community as a peaceable man, but witnesses cannot testify that the defendant is a truthful person since it is not pertinent to whether the defendant committed the murder."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts admissible to prove the character of a person to show propensity?", "answer": "No, evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person to show propensity, although it is admissible for other purposes such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence of the habit of a person or of the routine practice of an organization admissible?", "answer": "Yes, evidence of the habit of a person or of the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not, is admissible to prove that the conduct of the person or organization on a particular occasion was in conformity with the habit or routine practice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is corroborating testimony regarding a unique weapon used in multiple crimes admissible?", "answer": "Yes, corroborating testimony regarding a unique weapon used in multiple crimes is admissible to establish an identifying circumstance."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "On a cross-examination in a contract cause of action, is it proper to ask about the witness's reputation as the neighborhood alcoholic?", "answer": "No, on a cross-examination in a contract cause of action, it is not proper to ask about the witness's reputation as the neighborhood alcoholic."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a defendant introduces evidence of good general character, how may the prosecution rebut?", "answer": "If a defendant introduces evidence of good general character, the prosecution may rebut by reputation or opinion evidence of the defendant's poor character and may use specific acts evidence during its cross-examination of the defendant's good-character witnesses."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "On the cross-examination of a defendant, is it proper to ask about a prior conviction for tax fraud?", "answer": "Yes, on the cross-examination of a defendant, asking about a prior conviction for tax fraud is proper to show that the defendant is inclined to lie."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a defendant charged with murder show that he has the general character of being law-abiding and the narrower trait of being peaceable?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant charged with murder is allowed to show that he has the general character of being law-abiding and the narrower trait of being peaceable."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a defendant show the character of the victim to support the defendant's theory of self-defense?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can show the character of the victim by use of reputation or opinion evidence to show the victim was the aggressor and support the defendant's theory of self-defense."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a defendant's opinion evidence of his good character for truth and veracity admissible if the trait is not pertinent to the case?", "answer": "No. A defendant's opinion evidence of his good character for truth and veracity is inadmissible if the trait is not pertinent to the case."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence by a criminal defendant that he has a good general character admissible?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence by a criminal defendant that he has a good general character is admissible to show the improbability of committing the crime."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a negligence action, is testimony that the defendant had a reputation in the community of being reckless admissible to show negligence?", "answer": "No, in a negligence action, testimony that the defendant had a reputation in the community of being reckless is not admissible to show negligence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is the cross-examination of a defendant regarding a prior conviction proper if the court finds that the probative value for impeachment outweighs the prejudice to the defendant?", "answer": "Yes. The cross-examination of a defendant regarding a prior conviction is proper if the court finds that the probative value for impeachment outweighs the prejudice to the defendant."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a slander case where someone is called a thief, is evidence that the person has stolen in the past admissible?", "answer": "Yes. If you're being sued for slander because you called someone a thief, evidence that the person has stolen in the past is admissible because specific instances of conduct may be proved when character is directly in issue."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If character is called into question, what type of evidence is allowed?", "answer": "If character is called into question, only evidence about that particular character trait is allowed."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a defamation case where charity is the issue, is testimony from a witness about the plaintiff's honesty admissible?", "answer": "No, testimony from a witness about the plaintiff's honesty is inadmissible as nonprobative if charity is the issue in a defamation case."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When is character evidence admissible in criminal trials?", "answer": "Character evidence is admissible in criminal trials if offered by the defendant to show character not in keeping with the offense charged. The evidence is admitted by calling another witness whose testimony is limited to opinion or reputation."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is character evidence generally admissible to prove propensity in criminal or civil cases?", "answer": "No, character evidence is generally inadmissible to prove propensity in criminal or civil cases."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "How may the prosecution rebut evidence of the victim's violent character offered by the defendant?", "answer": "The prosecution may rebut by offering evidence of the victim's good character for that trait or the defendant's bad character for that trait."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What type of evidence may a criminal defendant offer to prove that the victim was the first aggressor?", "answer": "A criminal defendant may offer evidence of the victim's violent character to prove that the victim was the first aggressor by reputation or opinion only."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence of the routine practice of an organization relevant to prove conduct on a particular occasion?", "answer": "Yes, evidence of the routine practice of an organization is relevant to prove that the conduct of the organization on a particular occasion was in conformity with the routine practice, whether corroborated or not and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What are the requirements for an expert opinion to be admissible under Rule 702?", "answer": "In addition to the expert opinion being based on sufficient facts or data under Rule 702, the expert opinion must be the product of reliable principles and methods, and the witness must have applied those principles and methods in a reliable manner to the facts of the case."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What happens if an expert ignores recent studies and relies on insufficient studies to support his conclusions?", "answer": "If an expert ignores recent studies and the studies the expert relied on are not sufficient to support his conclusions, the expert opinion may be excluded as unreliable under Rule 702."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is the scope of an expert witness's testimony regarding the defendant's mental disorder?", "answer": "An expert witness's testimony is confined to giving an opinion as to whether the defendant had a serious mental disorder at the time of the offense, explaining the symptoms and characteristics of any diagnosis given, and providing other testimony regarding the defendant's mental status and motivation. The expert witness cannot give an ultimate opinion on whether the defendant was legally insane at the time of the alleged crime."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can an expert witness express a legal conclusion directly related to the ultimate issue of the case?", "answer": "No. An expert witness may not express a legal conclusion directly related to the ultimate issue of the case, such as whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent or whether a legal standard has been met."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What are the three basic criteria required to permit the testimony of an expert witness?", "answer": "The three basic criteria required to permit the testimony of an expert witness are: (1) the expert is qualified to give an opinion on the subject matter; (2) the state of the art or scientific knowledge permits a reasonable opinion to be given by the expert; and (3) the subject matter goes beyond the understanding of the average layman."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is the role of a trial judge regarding expert testimony to prove causation?", "answer": "The trial judge is responsible for making sure the expert testimony is relevant and grounded in scientific research. Before an otherwise qualified expert may testify as to causation, the proponent of the evidence must establish that the evidence is relevant, helpful to the jury, and that the methodology employed by the expert is reliable."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can an expert testify as to the way drug dealers operate and the meaning of code words used by dealers?", "answer": "Yes. An expert may testify as to the way drug dealers operate and the meaning of code words that dealers use, as long as the testimony is based on their expert opinion and not on the defendant's specific mental processes."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can an expert's opinion on an ultimate issue of the case be admissible in a civil case?", "answer": "Yes, in a civil case, an expert can testify to a person's mental state or condition. For example, an expert may testify that a homeowner was mentally unstable but had an intense fear of fire in a negligence case."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can an expert's opinion on an ultimate issue of the case be admissible in a criminal case?", "answer": "No, in a criminal case, an expert may not give an opinion as to whether a criminal defendant did or did not possess the mental state or condition that constitutes an element or defense of the crime charged. The expert can only diagnose a mental condition and explain what it is."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is an expert's testimony concerning the defendant's mental state or condition at the time of the crime admissible?", "answer": "No. An expert's testimony that expresses an opinion concerning the defendant's mental state or condition at the time of the crime is inadmissible since only the jury may address that ultimate issue."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a lay witness testify that a voice on a recording matches the voice heard on a different recording identified to the witness by someone else?", "answer": "No. A lay witness cannot testify that a voice on a recording matches the voice heard on a different recording and identified to the witness by someone else since it is not based on the witness's personal knowledge."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can you cross-examine an expert witness with specific acts that bear on his capacity as an expert?", "answer": "Yes. You can cross-examine an expert witness with specific acts that bear on his capacity as an expert."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a non-expert's analysis of a signature an accepted method of authenticating a person's signature on a document?", "answer": "No. A non-expert's analysis of a signature is not an accepted method of authenticating a person's signature on a document."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is asking an expert witness if he failed tests related to his field admissible?", "answer": "Yes, asking an expert witness if he failed tests related to his field is admissible because it is relevant to the weight to be given to the expert's testimony."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can an expert listen to the evidence in court and then testify, basing his opinion on the facts made known to him at the trial?", "answer": "Yes. An expert can listen to the evidence in court and then testify, basing his opinion on the facts made known to him at the trial."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a cocaine addict be regarded as an expert in ascertaining whether a drug is cocaine?", "answer": "Yes. A cocaine addict can be regarded as an expert in ascertaining whether a drug is cocaine."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a treatise be used on direct or cross-examination of an expert and be read to the jury as substantive evidence?", "answer": "Yes. If a party can establish that a treatise is reliable authority, then the treatise may be used on direct or cross-examination of an expert, and the treatise may be read to the jury as substantive evidence."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a letter attesting to an expert's qualifications be considered by the judge without regard to the hearsay rule?", "answer": "Yes. A letter attesting to an expert's qualifications may be considered by the judge only, without regard to the hearsay rule."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a statement of the declarant's then-existing state of mind be used to prove past facts?", "answer": "No. A statement of the declarant's then-existing state of mind cannot be used to prove past facts that the declarant remembers or believes."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a statement of the declarant's then-existing state of mind or emotional, sensory, or physical condition an exception to the hearsay rule?", "answer": "Yes, generally, a statement of the declarant's then-existing state of mind or emotional, sensory, or physical condition is an exception to the hearsay rule which covers statements of intent, belief, attitude, motive, mental feeling, pain, and bodily health."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is an out-of-court statement offered for its truth admissible?", "answer": "No. An out-of-court statement offered for its truth is inadmissible unless it falls within an exception to the hearsay rule or there are circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, necessity, and notice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What does the Settlement Privilege prohibit?", "answer": "The Settlement Privilege prohibits the use of settlement offers or statements made in furtherance of negotiating settlements to prove liability. In criminal cases, statements made by a defendant to the prosecutor during plea negotiations are generally inadmissible, but admissions made during police questioning are usually admissible as straightforward admissions by a party opponent."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are admissions by parties treated as hearsay or nonhearsay?", "answer": "Admissions by parties are treated as nonhearsay, and the admission of an employee may be admissible as a vicarious admission of the party in certain instances."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What must be done if an out-of-court statement quotes another out-of-court statement?", "answer": "If an out-of-court statement quotes another out-of-court statement, each statement must be analyzed independently, and the statement is admissible only if both hearsay statements fall within exceptions to the hearsay rule."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are settlement discussions or offers of compromise admissible as indications of fault, liability, or damage?", "answer": "No, under the Federal Rules of Evidence, settlement discussions or offers of compromise are not admissible as any kind of indication of fault, liability, or damage, provided there is a claim and a dispute as to liability or the amount/share of liability."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a child suffers from a goat bite at a defendant's petting zoo, and the defendant does not dispute his liability and says, 'I'd like to give you this check for $200 because I don't feel good about it,' is the statement admissible in a personal injury trial?", "answer": "Yes. The statement is admissible in a personal injury trial against him as the statement of a party-opponent since it is relevant to his liability and was not made in the course of settlement of a disputed claim."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is hearsay included within hearsay excluded under the hearsay rule?", "answer": "No, hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined out-of-court statements conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a statement be admissible as non-hearsay if it was not intended to demonstrate the truth of the matter asserted?", "answer": "Yes. An out-of-court statement is admissible as non-hearsay if the statement was not intended to demonstrate the truth of the matter asserted, but rather to demonstrate the effect upon the listener."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is the doctrine of limited admissibility?", "answer": "Under the doctrine of limited admissibility, a statement that is inadmissible hearsay to prove the truth of the statement may nevertheless be admitted to show the statement's effect on the hearer or reader. In a negligence case where knowledge of a danger is the issue, a third person's statement of warning is admissible for the limited purpose of showing knowledge or notice on the part of a listener."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When is a statement not hearsay if offered against a party?", "answer": "A statement is not hearsay if it is offered against a party and is a statement by the party's agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Under the Best Evidence Rule, when are audio recordings of a party admissible?", "answer": "Under the Best Evidence Rule, audio recordings of a party are admissible only where there is a need to prove the content of the recording. If a witness has independent knowledge, the audio recordings are not admissible, but the witness's testimony of the party's statements is still admissible as admissions of a party-opponent."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness testify as to the defendant's prior admission if the defendant denies making it at trial?", "answer": "Yes. If a defendant denies making an admission at trial, a witness can testify as to the defendant's prior admission. The witness's testimony is admissible both to impeach the defendant's testimony as a prior inconsistent statement and as substantive evidence because it is an admission of a party-opponent."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are statements that constitute verbal acts or legally operative words hearsay?", "answer": "No, statements that constitute verbal acts or legally operative words are not hearsay because they are not offered for the truth."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a statement by a party that implies fault or an admission of negligence admissible?", "answer": "Yes. A statement by a party that implies fault or an admission of negligence is admissible under the party admission exception to the hearsay rule, although statements specific to settlement negotiations or offers to pay medical expenses are not admissible."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a wife's testimony that her unavailable husband told her that the defendant had threatened his life admissible?", "answer": "No. A wife's testimony that her unavailable husband told her that the defendant had threatened his life is inadmissible as multiple hearsay."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are out-of-court statements admissible if they are offered to show the effect of the statements on the defendant?", "answer": "Yes, out-of-court statements are admissible if the statements are offered to show the effect of the statements on the defendant rather than for the truth of the matter asserted. This is not hearsay."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is an admission by an employee of a party-opponent admissible if the admission was made after the declarant stopped working for the party-opponent?", "answer": "No. An admission by an employee of a party-opponent is inadmissible hearsay if the admission was made after the declarant stopped working for the party-opponent. The employee's statement must be made when the employee was still working for the employer."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can testimony be offered concerning a witness's prior identification of the defendant if the witness refuses to testify at trial?", "answer": "No, testimony cannot be offered concerning a witness's prior identification of the defendant if the witness refuses to testify at trial. It is hearsay not within any exception."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a witness's testimony that the defendant silently acknowledged a statement admissible?", "answer": "Yes. A witness's testimony that the defendant silently acknowledged a statement is admissible as an adoption of the statement and may be offered into evidence as an admission of a party-opponent, and it will not constitute hearsay."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Does the marital communications privilege survive divorce and death?", "answer": "Yes. The marital communications privilege survives divorce and death."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a defendant becomes aware of an accidental disclosure of a privileged document and does not seek the return of the document until the day before trial, does this constitute a waiver of the attorney-client privilege?", "answer": "Yes. If the defendant becomes aware of the accidental disclosure and does not seek the return of the document until the day before trial, this constitutes a waiver of the attorney-client privilege regarding the disclosed document."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a defendant inadvertently turns over a document during discovery containing communications between the defendant and its counsel regarding the litigation, does this operate as a subject matter waiver?", "answer": "No, if a defendant inadvertently turns over a document during discovery containing communications between the defendant and its counsel regarding the litigation, this inadvertent/accidental disclosure of protected materials does not operate as a subject matter waiver."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Under Rule 502, when does waiver extend to undisclosed communications or information?", "answer": "Under Rule 502, waiver never extends to undisclosed communications or information unless the waiver was intentional. This means waiver can only be found in such situations if the disclosing party was aware not merely that he was showing a document to his adversary and that it was arguably subject to some privilege, but also knew and intended that such disclosure would result in a waiver of the privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What does the attorney-client privilege apply to?", "answer": "The attorney-client privilege applies to confidential communications from a client to a lawyer for purposes of obtaining legal advice and services. Observations of a client's demeanor and fee information are not privileged; likewise, information about the fact of employment and the identity of the client is generally not covered by the privilege unless the revelation of identity would reveal the content of lawyer-client communications."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can jointly represented clients assert the attorney-client privilege with respect to their communications with a lawyer on a matter of common interest?", "answer": "Yes, two or more jointly represented clients may assert the attorney-client privilege with respect to their communications with a lawyer on a matter of common interest to the co-clients, but they may not assert the privilege with respect to these communications in any subsequent litigation between the former co-clients."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If an attorney is consulted and retained by two clients to establish a business, can the privilege be invoked for communications made to the attorney in subsequent litigation between the clients?", "answer": "No, if an attorney is consulted and retained by two clients to establish a business, the privilege cannot be invoked for communications made to the attorney retained in common due to subsequent litigation between the clients."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a defendant and co-defendant are tried jointly for murder, and the co-defendant and his attorney offer to reveal the murder weapon's location for leniency, but the victim's father kills the co-defendant, can the prosecution compel the co-defendant's attorney to disclose what the co-defendant revealed?", "answer": "No. The prosecution cannot compel the co-defendant's attorney to disclose what the co-defendant revealed because the communications come under the attorney-client privilege, which was not waived by the co-defendant because he never disclosed the confidential communications to the prosecution."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What happens if a defendant voluntarily and selectively discloses privileged information to a prosecutor without taking steps to protect the privileged nature of such information?", "answer": "If a defendant voluntarily and selectively discloses privileged information to a prosecutor without taking steps to protect the privileged nature of such information, the attorney-client privilege has been waived as to the disclosed information and all information on the same subject."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Does the attorney-client privilege apply to fee arrangements/payments?", "answer": "No. The attorney-client privilege generally does not apply to fee arrangements/payments as they are outside the scope of protection of the attorney-client privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a trial for tax evasion, is the amount the defendant paid in legal fees to his attorney admissible?", "answer": "Yes, in a trial for tax evasion, the amount the defendant paid in legal fees to his attorney is admissible as relevant information because such records of fee arrangements and payments are not protected by the attorney-client privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a defendant's letter to his attorney that contains statements in furtherance of a crime or fraud protected by the attorney-client privilege?", "answer": "No. A defendant's letter to his attorney that contains statements that were in furtherance of a crime or fraud is not protected by the attorney-client privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is an accident report prepared for an attorney a privileged communication from client to attorney?", "answer": "Yes. An accident report prepared for an attorney is a privileged communication from client to attorney and its production cannot be demanded."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a lawsuit between two parties that initially jointly consulted with an attorney, is testimony about admissions made in that attorney-client conference admissible?", "answer": "Yes, in a lawsuit between two parties that initially jointly consulted with an attorney, testimony about admissions made in that attorney-client conference is admissible despite the attorney-client privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a lawsuit against an attorney for double-billing, does the attorney-client privilege protect information regarding hours billed by the attorney to other clients?", "answer": "No, in a lawsuit against an attorney for double-billing, the attorney-client privilege does not protect information regarding hours billed by the attorney to other clients."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is testimony about admissions made in an attorney-client conference admissible?", "answer": "No, testimony about admissions made in an attorney-client conference is inadmissible because of the attorney-client privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are statements made to a person hired by an attorney privileged?", "answer": "Yes. If an attorney hires someone, statements made to that person by the defendant are privileged."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is there a privilege if a client tells his attorney about a future crime or fraud?", "answer": "No. There is no privilege if a client tells his attorney of a future crime or fraud, even if the attorney did not know that the client was telling him about a future crime or fraud."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When an attorney acts for joint clients, can the privilege be invoked in a suit between the two parties?", "answer": "No, when an attorney acts for joint clients, no privilege can be invoked in a suit between the two parties."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In a jurisdiction with a doctor-patient privilege, can a doctor's attorney assert the privilege on behalf of the doctor?", "answer": "Yes, in a jurisdiction with a doctor-patient privilege, the assertion of a privilege by the doctor's attorney, present at the trial as a spectator and allowed by the trial judge to speak, is a method to exclude evidence of statements to a doctor."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If the patient's attorney is present in court, who should assert the doctor-patient privilege?", "answer": "If the patient's attorney is sitting in court, the assertion of the doctor-patient privilege by the patient's attorney is the best way to exclude a privileged statement made by the patient."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Who is the holder of the doctor-patient privilege?", "answer": "The holder of the doctor-patient privilege is the patient, but the doctor is under a duty to assert the privilege on behalf of the patient if the patient or his duly authorized representative is not present to assert it."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Does the physician-patient privilege apply to non-medical matters?", "answer": "No. The physician-patient privilege does not apply to non-medical matters."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a mental patient's statement to his nurse that he is going to kill someone privileged?", "answer": "No. A mental patient telling his nurse that he is going to kill someone is not privileged."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness in a civil action for negligence refuse to answer a question about personal use of drugs if it could subject the witness to criminal liability?", "answer": "Yes, under cross-examination in a civil action for negligence, a witness may properly refuse to answer a question about his personal use of drugs if doing so could subject the witness to criminal liability."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "In what types of proceedings can a person invoke the privilege against self-incrimination?", "answer": "A person may invoke the privilege against self-incrimination in any civil or criminal proceeding, whether formal or informal. The privilege is available only where the possible consequence of the incriminating statement is criminal prosecution; it may not be invoked to shield against personal disgrace, loss of employment, or civil confinement."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When can a witness invoke the privilege against self-incrimination?", "answer": "A witness can invoke the privilege against self-incrimination only if the judge believes that there is some reasonable possibility that the witness will incriminate himself."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a witness refuses to answer at cross-examination on the ground of self-incrimination, what can the judge do?", "answer": "If a witness refuses to answer at cross-examination on the ground of self-incrimination, the judge may order the witness to testify or have the direct testimony stricken because the invocation of the privilege prevents adequate cross-examination."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a dead person invoke a privilege?", "answer": "No. A dead person cannot invoke a privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can privileged information be disclosed in a Grand Jury Hearing without a waiver of the privilege?", "answer": "No. Privileged information cannot be disclosed in a Grand Jury Hearing absent a waiver of the privilege because it is protected under the rules of privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness invoke the Fifth Amendment and remain silent if the judge believes there is some reasonable possibility that the witness will incriminate herself?", "answer": "Yes. A witness can invoke the Fifth Amendment and remain silent if the judge believes there is some reasonable possibility that the witness will incriminate herself because the Fifth Amendment protects against self-incrimination."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a statement made to a priest at a social event privileged?", "answer": "No. A statement made to a priest at a social event is not privileged because the statement is not within the scope of the privilege."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "An insurance investigator testifies in an automobile accident case on behalf of the defendant. Can the plaintiff cross-examine and impeach the investigator by showing that he is employed by the defendant-driver's insurer?", "answer": "Yes. The plaintiff may cross-examine and impeach the investigator by showing that he is employed by the defendant-driver's insurer because this evidence is admissible to show bias."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can evidence of liability insurance be admissible for purposes other than proving negligence, such as impeachment for bias?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence of liability insurance is admissible for purposes other than proving negligence, such as impeachment for bias, because it can be relevant for showing bias or prejudice."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can evidence of liability insurance be used substantively to prove negligence or other wrongful conduct under the Federal Rules of Evidence?", "answer": "No. Evidence of liability insurance cannot be used substantively to prove negligence or other wrongful conduct under the Federal Rules of Evidence because it is inadmissible for these purposes."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is evidence of an insurance policy admissible to prove the defendant owned or had responsibility for the insured property?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence of an insurance policy is admissible to prove the defendant owned or had responsibility for the insured property because it is relevant to ownership or control."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When are subsequent remedial measures inadmissible to prove negligence or fault?", "answer": "Subsequent remedial measures are inadmissible to prove negligence or fault because their admission would discourage taking such measures to prevent future harm."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can evidence of subsequent remedial measures be admissible for purposes other than proving negligence, such as impeachment or proving ownership?", "answer": "Yes. Evidence of subsequent remedial measures can be admissible for purposes other than proving negligence, such as impeachment or proving ownership, because it can be relevant for these other purposes."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can subsequent remedial measures be admissible to establish that a defendant owned or controlled a property involved in an accident?", "answer": "Yes. Subsequent remedial measures are admissible to establish that a defendant owned or controlled a property involved in an accident because it is relevant to the issue of control."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are subsequent remedial measures admissible to rebut a defendant's claim that he did not own or control property involved in an accident where he subsequently repaired the property?", "answer": "Yes. Subsequent remedial measures are admissible to rebut a defendant's claim that he did not own or control property involved in an accident where he subsequently repaired the property because it directly challenges the defendant's claim."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A defendant is sued by the plaintiff in civil court for the tort of battery. During settlement negotiations, the defendant tells the plaintiff he is sorry for hitting him and that he is working on his rage issues. Can the prosecutor introduce the defendant's statement in a subsequent criminal prosecution for assault?", "answer": "No. The prosecutor may not introduce the defendant's statement in a subsequent criminal prosecution for assault because statements made during compromise negotiations are generally inadmissible in subsequent criminal cases."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A defendant is sued by the plaintiff in civil court for the tort of battery. During settlement negotiations, the defendant tells the plaintiff he is sorry for hitting him and that he is working on his rage issues. The defendant settles the civil suit and is then charged with criminal assault. Can the prosecutor introduce the defendant's statement in the subsequent criminal prosecution?", "answer": "No. The prosecutor may not introduce the defendant's statement in the subsequent criminal prosecution because statements made during compromise negotiations over a disputed claim in a civil case are generally not admissible in a subsequent criminal prosecution."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A defendant makes a statement admitting fault to a public officer conducting a regulatory investigation. Is the statement admissible in a criminal case?", "answer": "Yes. The statement is admissible in a criminal case because admissions of fault made to a public officer during a regulatory investigation are not protected under the rules of compromise negotiations."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are offers of compromise and statements of fault made during compromise negotiations over a disputed claim in a civil case admissible in a subsequent criminal prosecution?", "answer": "No. Offers of compromise and statements of fault made during compromise negotiations over a disputed claim in a civil case are generally not admissible in a subsequent criminal prosecution because their admission would discourage settlements."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a defendant's statement admitting fault to a public officer conducting a regulatory investigation admissible in a criminal case?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant's statement admitting fault to a public officer conducting a regulatory investigation is admissible in a criminal case because it is an exception to the general rule excluding such statements."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A defendant says to the plaintiff 'I'm sorry my dog bit you, please allow me to pay for your hospital bills.' Is the defendant's offer to pay the hospital bill protected?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant's offer to pay the hospital bill is protected, but any admissions of fault made during the offer are not protected."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A defendant says to the plaintiff \"I'm sorry my dog bit you, please allow me to pay for your hospital bills.\" Is the defendant's offer to pay the hospital bill protected?", "answer": "Yes. The defendant's offer to pay the hospital bill is protected because an offer to pay medical expenses is inadmissible for proving culpable conduct."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Does the protection of an offer to pay medical expenses apply to admissions made by a party in the course of the offer?", "answer": "No. The protection of an offer to pay medical expenses does not apply to admissions made by a party in the course of the offer because only the actual offer or payment is protected."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is an offer to pay medical expenses inadmissible for proving culpable conduct?", "answer": "Yes. An offer to pay medical expenses is inadmissible for proving culpable conduct because the law aims to encourage offers to assist injured parties without fear of legal consequences."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are statements or admissions made in compromise negotiations inadmissible to prove liability if a claim is disputed as to validity or amount?", "answer": "Yes. Statements or admissions made in compromise negotiations are inadmissible to prove liability if a claim is disputed as to validity or amount because their exclusion encourages settlement negotiations."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can statements made in compromise negotiations be used to show bias, prejudice, negative undue delay, or obstruction?", "answer": "Yes. Statements made in compromise negotiations can be used to show bias, prejudice, negative undue delay, or obstruction because these purposes are exceptions to the general rule of inadmissibility."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is any evidence of furnishing, offering, or promising to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses occasioned by an injury admissible?", "answer": "No. Any evidence of furnishing, offering, or promising to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses occasioned by an injury is not admissible because the law seeks to encourage such offers without legal repercussions."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are offers of compromise inadmissible to encourage settlement negotiations?", "answer": "Yes. Offers of compromise are inadmissible because the policy of the law is to encourage settlement negotiations."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are offers of compromise to settle a claim inadmissible even if the party acknowledges negligence?", "answer": "Yes. Offers of compromise to settle a claim are inadmissible even if the party acknowledges negligence because the policy of the law is to encourage settlement negotiations."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Are admissions in conjunction with an offer to pay medical bills admissible?", "answer": "Yes. Admissions in conjunction with an offer to pay medical bills are admissible because the protection only applies to the offer or payment itself, not to accompanying admissions."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a defendant makes an offer of compromise, are all of the defendant's statements inadmissible?", "answer": "Yes. If a defendant makes an offer of compromise, all of the defendant's statements are inadmissible because the law aims to promote settlement negotiations by excluding such statements."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "If a defendant offers to pay medical expenses, is only the statement about medical expenses excluded?", "answer": "Yes. If a defendant offers to pay medical expenses, only the statement about medical expenses is excluded because the protection is limited to the offer or payment itself."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is an offer to pay medical expenses made immediately after an accident inadmissible as an offer to pay medical expenses?", "answer": "Yes. An offer to pay medical expenses made immediately after an accident is inadmissible as an offer to pay medical expenses because the law seeks to encourage such offers without fear of legal consequences."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What is required for offers to compromise to be inadmissible?", "answer": "Offers to compromise are only inadmissible if the claim is in dispute because this rule encourages settlement negotiations by protecting statements made during disputes."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What does the best evidence rule require when the terms of a writing are in issue?", "answer": "The best evidence rule requires the original writing itself to be offered into evidence. If the original is unavailable for reasons other than the misconduct of the proponent, then copies or oral testimony are admissible."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "A government agent overhears a conversation between a defendant and his conspirators about a planned robbery. Can the agent's in-court testimony relating the conversation be admissible?", "answer": "Yes. The agent's in-court testimony relating the conversation is admissible because it is based on personal knowledge and not dependent on an audiotape of the conversation."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When does the best evidence rule apply?", "answer": "The best evidence rule applies only if the testimony is derived from the writing itself, not from personal knowledge. If the fact to be proved has an existence independent of any writing or recording, there is no need to produce the original."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a plaintiff testify as to the condition of an item if the item is lost and cannot be introduced into evidence?", "answer": "Yes. The plaintiff can testify as to the condition of the item if the plaintiff has personal knowledge of it, despite the item's unavailability."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When should testimony about the contents of a letter be admitted in evidence?", "answer": "Testimony about the contents of a letter should be admitted in evidence only if the judge finds that the original letter is unavailable."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a witness's testimony about writing a letter admissible without the letter itself?", "answer": "Yes. A witness's testimony about writing a letter is admissible without the letter itself because the testimony is not about the contents of the letter."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a video of a defamatory statement considered the best evidence under the best evidence rule?", "answer": "Yes. A video of the defamatory statement is considered the best evidence as compared to testimony of the statement under the best evidence rule."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What must be produced to prove the terms of a writing where the terms are material?", "answer": "The original must be produced unless it is unavailable for some reason other than the fault of the proponent under the best evidence rule."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Is a copy admissible if there is a question about the authenticity of an original document?", "answer": "No. A copy is not admissible if there is a question about the authenticity of an original document."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What should the court do if there is an original document and a copy that is different?", "answer": "The court should admit both documents and let the jury decide which one is authentic."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "What does the best evidence rule require for proving the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph?", "answer": "The best evidence rule requires the party to produce the original (or a duplicate) or account for its nonproduction."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can a witness refer to collateral documents without providing the documents themselves?", "answer": "Yes. A witness may refer to collateral documents without providing the documents themselves."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "When are summaries of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs admissible?", "answer": "Summaries are admissible if the original and summary are separately authenticated by giving notice to the parties and making the originals or duplicates available for examination or copying by other parties at a reasonable time and place."}
{"topic": "Evidence", "question": "Can voluminous material be presented in the form of a chart?", "answer": "Yes. Voluminous material may be presented in the form of a chart as long as the original documents are available to the other party for examination and copying."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O owns land and B lends O money with the understanding the land is the collateral for the debt. Instead of executing a note or mortgage, O gives B a deed that is absolute on its face with the expectation that B will deed the land back to O after the loan from B is repaid. How will the court treat this deed?", "answer": "The court will treat this deed as an equitable mortgage because the substance of the transaction indicates it was intended for security rather than an outright transfer."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A purchase-money mortgage that is recorded is given priority over non-PMMs, even if the non-PMM was recorded first. Does an unrecorded PMM have priority over mortgages, liens, and other claims against the mortgagor that arise prior to the mortgagor's acquisition of title?", "answer": "Yes. An unrecorded PMM has priority over mortgages, liens, and other claims against the mortgagor that arise prior to the mortgagor's acquisition of title because PMMs are prioritized in property transactions."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the priority of a recorded purchase-money mortgage (PMM) over non-PMMs?", "answer": "A recorded PMM has priority over non-PMMs, even if the non-PMM was recorded first."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A buyer purchasing a home borrows 70% of the purchase price from a bank and gives the bank a purchase-money mortgage which is promptly recorded. The buyer also borrows 30% from the seller and gives the seller a purchase-money mortgage which is not recorded. Which PMM has priority if the buyer defaults?", "answer": "The bank's PMM will have priority over the seller's PMM because the seller's PMM is unrecorded, and recording statutes protect subsequent bona fide purchasers for value who record first."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a buyer purchasing a home borrows 70% of the purchase price from a bank and gives the bank a purchase-money mortgage which is promptly recorded, and also borrows 30% from the seller and gives the seller a purchase-money mortgage which is not recorded?", "answer": "The bank's PMM will have priority over the seller's PMM because the seller's PMM is unrecorded."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a mortgage?", "answer": "A mortgage is the conveyance of an estate or pledge of property as security for the payment of money or the performance of some other act, conditioned to become void upon such payment or performance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How is judicial reluctance shown in relation to an affirmative burden to pay money over an indefinite period?", "answer": "There is judicial reluctance to recognize an affirmative burden to pay money in installments over an indefinite period as a burden which can be affixed to bind future owners of land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How will the court treat an absolute deed given for security purposes?", "answer": "The court will treat an absolute deed given for security purposes as an equitable mortgage, requiring foreclosure before the property can be sold."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How does equity treat an absolute deed intended for security?", "answer": "In equity, an absolute deed intended for security will be construed as a mortgage."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a mortgagor's property be enforceable without the mortgagor being personally liable on the underlying obligation?", "answer": "Yes. A mortgagor need not be personally liable on the underlying obligation for a mortgage on her property to be enforceable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is each co-owner of a property encumbered by a mortgage liable for the entire mortgage?", "answer": "Yes. Each co-owner of a property encumbered by a mortgage is liable for 100% of the mortgage."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens under the title theory of mortgages if one joint co-owner takes out a mortgage on jointly owned property?", "answer": "Under the title theory of mortgages, the taking of a mortgage terminates the joint tenancy as to that co-owner."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How may a note be transferred?", "answer": "A note may be transferred either by endorsing it and delivering it to the transferee, or by a separate document of assignment. The mortgage will automatically follow a properly transferred note."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens when a person takes property and assumes a mortgage?", "answer": "When a person takes property and assumes a mortgage, he or she becomes personally liable on the debt, and the original debtor remains personally liable unless released by a novation or release from the mortgagee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "S sells land to B that is subject to a recorded mortgage, but the deed from S to B is silent as to whether B is assuming the mortgage. If B fails to make the payments, can the mortgagee obtain a deficiency judgment against B?", "answer": "No. The mortgagee cannot obtain a deficiency judgment against B because a buyer's express assumption of the mortgage is required to make him personally liable on the mortgage."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is required for a purchaser who takes subject to a mortgage to avoid personal liability for the mortgage debt?", "answer": "The purchaser must not expressly assume the mortgage to avoid personal liability for the mortgage debt. The mortgagee can foreclose but only seek deficiency from the seller after foreclosure."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a buyer-grantee properly accepts a valid deed that contains a mortgage provision?", "answer": "The buyer-grantee accepts all the conditions and terms within the deed, and the mortgagee can seek a deficiency judgment from the grantee who becomes primarily liable on the mortgage."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the liability of a buyer who assumes an existing mortgage?", "answer": "A buyer who assumes an existing mortgage is primarily liable for the mortgage debt and any foreclosure deficiency."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a mortgagor conveys land without the prior consent of the bank under a valid due-on-sale clause?", "answer": "The bank may lawfully accelerate the debt if the mortgagor conveys the land without prior consent under a valid due-on-sale clause."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a grantee takes subject to a mortgage but does not expressly assume the mortgage?", "answer": "The grantee is not personally liable for the loan, but the mortgagee can foreclose on the property if the mortgage is not paid."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the liabilities of a mortgagee who takes possession of the premises after the mortgagor defaults?", "answer": "The mortgagee is subject to the same liabilities in tort as the property owner."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a grantee purchases property subject to a mortgage without assuming it?", "answer": "The grantee is not personally liable on the mortgage, and only the mortgagor remains personally liable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the liability of the original mortgagor if a grantee signs an assumption agreement?", "answer": "The original mortgagor is secondarily liable as a surety, while the grantee becomes primarily liable to the lender."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the liabilities of a transferee who assumes the mortgage?", "answer": "The transferee is primarily liable, and the mortgagor is secondarily liable, meaning both are personally liable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the liability of a transferee who takes subject to the mortgage?", "answer": "The transferee has no personal liability, and the mortgagor remains personally liable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the liability of a person who takes property by quitclaim deed with no mention of a mortgage?", "answer": "The person takes the property subject to the mortgage, and the mortgagee cannot institute an in personam action against the person for default."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an alternative to foreclosure if a mortgage is in default?", "answer": "The mortgagor and mortgagee can agree that the mortgagor will voluntarily convey the property to the lender in full satisfaction of the mortgage debt, but a deed in lieu of foreclosure may be set aside later by a court if not fair and equitable in all respects."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a mortgagee agrees to accept the mortgagor's fee title instead of foreclosing?", "answer": "The mortgagee takes the title subject to any junior liens the mortgagee placed on the property, which can only be extinguished through foreclosure."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the implication of a prohibition of prepayment in a mortgage?", "answer": "A prohibition of prepayment is implied, and the mortgagor has no right to prepayment unless the mortgage provides otherwise. A prepayment penalty or prohibition is valid and regarded as an agreed-upon alternative form of performance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What can a mortgagee do if a mortgage is in default?", "answer": "The mortgagor and mortgagee can agree that the mortgagor will give the mortgagee fee simple title to the property in satisfaction of the mortgage debt, but a deed in lieu of foreclosure may be set aside later by a court if not fair and equitable in all respects."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What claims does a mortgagee have?", "answer": "A mortgagee has both an in personam claim against the mortgagor on the debt and an in rem action against the security."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O specifically devises his house to A in his will, but the house is lost in foreclosure before O dies and sold at auction. Who gets the proceeds from the foreclosure sale if O dies before the surplus proceeds are distributed?", "answer": "The proceeds from the foreclosure sale go to O's heirs instead of A because under the doctrine of ademption, the specific legacy fails if the subject is not in existence at the testator's death."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens under the doctrine of ademption if a testator's specific bequest is not in existence at the testator's death?", "answer": "The gift fails because it is deemed revoked, and the devisee or legatee takes nothing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What does an acceleration clause in a mortgage allow?", "answer": "An acceleration clause allows the entire amount of the principal to become due and payable in the event of the mortgagor's default."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A defendant tears down one of the barns on a farm secured by a mortgage. Is this a default that can result in acceleration of the mortgage?", "answer": "Yes. This is a default that can result in acceleration of the mortgage because tearing down a barn is considered waste, which can trigger the acceleration clause."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When can an acceleration clause be triggered in a mortgage?", "answer": "An acceleration clause can be triggered by defaults in compliance with other covenants in the mortgage, such as failure to pay taxes, maintain insurance, commit waste, or violation of a due-on-sale clause."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if there is a valid assumption of a mortgage debt?", "answer": "The grantee becomes the principal debtor, and the grantor-mortgagor becomes a surety, secondarily liable for any deficiency not paid by the grantee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What effect does a modification of the original debt have on the priority of junior lienholders?", "answer": "A modification that has a material adverse effect upon a junior lienholder may cause a loss in priority of a portion or all of the security unless the junior lienholders have consented. If there is no material prejudice, the priority does not change."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the priority of the first mortgage over later mortgages?", "answer": "The first mortgage has priority over later mortgages if the first mortgage is recorded and the second mortgagee has notice of it. In the event of foreclosure, proceeds are paid to the first mortgagee first."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the two funds rule of marshaling in regards to mortgages?", "answer": "The two funds rule of marshaling requires a senior creditor with two or more funds to satisfy its debt to first dispose of the fund not available to a junior creditor. This rule is inapplicable if there is only one parcel of land with multiple mortgages."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A grantor conveys commercial land to a friend 'so long as marijuana is not sold on the property.' What happens if marijuana is sold on the property?", "answer": "If marijuana is sold on the property, the grantor retains a possibility of reverter and would become the owner of the property by operation of law because the estate is to end at once upon the stated event happening."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a fee simple determinable?", "answer": "A fee simple determinable terminates upon the happening of a stated event and automatically reverts to the grantor. It is characterized by words of duration such as 'so long as,' 'while,' 'until,' or 'during.'"}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O executes and delivers a deed to A containing the language: 'To my daughter A when she marries B.' What type of interest does A have?", "answer": "A has a springing executory interest because the property will spring out from the transferor O to the transferee A if the event happens."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a springing executory interest?", "answer": "A springing executory interest is an executory interest that follows an interest that the grantor held. The grantor is not divested at the time of the instrument but at some later time if a specified event happens."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the characteristics of an indefeasibly vested remainder?", "answer": "The holder of an indefeasibly vested remainder is certain to acquire a possessory estate in the future without any conditions attached. All vested remainders are transferable (alienable), descendible, and devisable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When is a remainder vested?", "answer": "A remainder is vested if: (1) the remainder is given to a presently existing and ascertained person, and (2) it is not subject to a condition precedent."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A deed reads, 'To A and his heirs until A's daughter marries, and then to A's daughter and her heirs in fee simple.' What type of interests do A and A's daughter have?", "answer": "A has a defeasible fee simple determinable, and A's daughter has an executory interest."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a fee simple is conveyed with a limitation that if a stated event occurs, title is automatically divested by an executory interest in a transferee, what type of estate is this?", "answer": "This estate is a defeasible fee simple determinable subject to an executory interest."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a remainderman pays property taxes during the life tenancy, can he seek reimbursement from the life tenant?", "answer": "Yes. The remainderman can seek reimbursement from the life tenant since the life tenant has a duty to pay such taxes to the extent of the income that can be earned on the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What duties does a life tenant have in the absence of a contrary direction in the document creating the life estate?", "answer": "A life tenant must pay all routine maintenance costs, mortgage interest, and general property taxes that accrue during the continuance of the life estate. The life tenant has no duty to expend more than the income generated from the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A life tenant replaces a ceiling light with an antique chandelier and tells the remainderman it should be removed after her death. Can her personal representative remove the chandelier after her death?", "answer": "Yes. Her personal representative may remove the chandelier after her death and give it to the nephew because the life tenant has the right to remove annexed chattels within a reasonable time after the life tenancy has expired."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can life tenants remove annexed chattels after the life tenancy has expired?", "answer": "Yes. Life tenants have the right to remove annexed chattels within a reasonable time after the life tenancy has expired, provided the removal can be effected without causing substantial injury to the realty or substantial destruction of the fixture itself."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O conveys to A 'so long as the land is used for a church' and then O dies intestate. Thirty years later, A demolishes the church. Is the heir entitled to possession?", "answer": "Yes. The heir is now entitled to possession because the conveyance was a fee simple determinable with a possibility of reverter, which is not subject to the Rule Against Perpetuities."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the characteristics of a vested remainder?", "answer": "A vested remainder is descendible, devisable, and alienable, meaning it can be conveyed to another party and the grantee will have the same rights as the grantor."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "To what extent is a life tenant obligated to pay property taxes assessed against the property?", "answer": "A life tenant is obligated to pay the property taxes assessed against the property only to the extent the life tenant receives income from the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A devise reads 'to B, for life, with remainder to my descendants per stirpes.' When is the remainder contingent?", "answer": "The remainder is contingent if a court implies a condition that the remaindermen survive B."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A conveyance reads 'to B and his heirs.' What interest does B have under this conveyance?", "answer": "B has a fee simple interest, and the heirs have no interest under this conveyance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A conveys to B for life, with remainder to C's children who are not yet born. What type of interest do C's unborn children have?", "answer": "C's unborn children have a contingent remainder."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A deed conveys a life estate to be used for a specific purpose. If it is no longer used for that purpose, what can be done?", "answer": "You can enjoin the holder of the life estate, and damages can be recovered but impounded for future distribution."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How are conveyances interpreted to prevent restraints on alienation?", "answer": "To prevent restraints on alienation, if there is a question as to the interpretation of a conveyance, it will be interpreted as a fee simple absolute and restrictions in the conveyance will be regarded as contractual."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a valid remainder after a life estate still valid if provisions on the remainder interest are declared void as restraints on alienation?", "answer": "Yes. A valid remainder after a life estate is still valid even if provisions on the remainder interest are declared void as restraints on alienation."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens when a grantor conveys a fee simple determinable followed by a void executory interest?", "answer": "The grantor retains a possibility of reverter."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the holder of a life estate obligated to pay for a mortgage on the property?", "answer": "The holder of a life estate is obligated to pay the interest portion of a mortgage on the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the holder of a life estate responsible for with regard to property taxes?", "answer": "The life tenant is responsible for property taxes only to the extent that he or she receives income from the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who is responsible for paying the principal portion of a mortgage on a property with a life estate and a remainder interest?", "answer": "The remainderman must pay the principal portion of the mortgage."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What type of remainder is created if a remainder is created in a class that could grow?", "answer": "The remainder is vested subject to partial defeasance (i.e., subject to open)."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a conveyance of a future interest by quitclaim deed valid if a statute provides that any interest in land is freely alienable?", "answer": "Yes. A conveyance of a future interest by quitclaim deed is valid, and title will vest in the grantee when the occurrence happens."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When is an interest created in a third person to follow a fee simple determinable void?", "answer": "An interest created in a third person to follow a fee simple determinable is void if it is not sure to vest within lives in being (people identified in the granting instrument)."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A conveyance reads 'to B, his heirs and assigns, so long as the premises are used for residential purposes, then to C and his heirs and assigns.' What type of interest is created?", "answer": "This creates a possibility of reverter."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the owner of a defeasible fee simple have the right to take minerals from the land without notice to any executory interests?", "answer": "Yes. The owner of a defeasible fee simple has the right to take minerals from the land without notice to any executory interests."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a life tenant wants to demolish a building on the property to build a shopping mall, what does this constitute?", "answer": "This constitutes waste."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A conveyance reads 'to A for the purpose of constructing a day care center.' What type of estate is created?", "answer": "A fee simple absolute is created because there is no durational language."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a tenant in common seek contribution from other co-tenants for repairs, taxes, and mortgage payments?", "answer": "Yes. A tenant in common may seek contribution from the other co-tenants for all repairs, taxes, and mortgage payments made on the property that exceeds the percentage interest of the paying tenant in common."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a tenant in common entitled to be reimbursed for improvements made to the property without an agreement by the other co-tenants or a court order?", "answer": "No. A tenant in common is not entitled to be reimbursed for improvements made to the property absent an agreement by the other co-tenants or pursuant to a court order."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a person mortgages his interest in a property but dies before the loan is fully repaid?", "answer": "The property will go to his heirs/devisees as cotenants. The property remains subject to the mortgage, and all co-tenants are obligated to pay their share of the mortgage, taxes, etc. Co-tenants who obtain their interest in the same document are fiduciaries of one another. If a co-tenant later acquires superior title to the property, such as by a subsequent tax or mortgage foreclosure sale, the co-tenant must give the other co-tenants a reasonable opportunity to acquire their proportional share."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a co-tenant lease his portion of the property interest without the consent of the other co-tenants?", "answer": "Yes. One of the co-tenants in a tenancy in common can lease his portion of the property interest without the consent of the other co-tenants."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a joint tenant's interest be devised by will?", "answer": "No. A joint tenant's interest cannot be devised by will because when one joint tenant dies, the survivor becomes the sole owner of the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a joint tenant's creditor fails to execute on the judgment against the joint tenant before the joint tenant's death?", "answer": "The surviving joint tenant receives the real property in fee simple free and clear of any liens against the joint tenant's interest."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a co-tenant in a tenancy in common have the right to lease out his portion of the tenancy without the approval of the other co-tenants?", "answer": "Yes. A co-tenant in a tenancy in common has the right to lease out his portion of the tenancy without the approval of the other co-tenants, but he must share the rent proceeds with the other co-tenants, and the renter must share possession of the premises with the other co-tenants."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is physical partition available in a partition action if a zoning ordinance makes it impossible to divide the land fairly?", "answer": "No. The option of physical partition is not available if a zoning ordinance makes it impossible to divide the land fairly."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to a joint tenant's interest at the joint tenant's death?", "answer": "The joint tenant's interest goes to the other joint tenants, regardless of what the dead joint tenant's will states."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What rights does a cotenant of real property have?", "answer": "A cotenant of real property has a right to a partition and an accounting. Adverse possession will not apply to co-tenancies unless one cotenant was ousted."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a tenancy of the entirety be severed by unilateral conveyance?", "answer": "No. A tenancy of the entirety may not be severed by unilateral conveyance. The tenants must mutually agree to convey to another person or one must convey to the other."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to a lien on a joint tenant's share if the joint tenant dies?", "answer": "The lien is extinguished, and the surviving joint tenant owns the whole property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if one joint tenant quitclaims his interest?", "answer": "The joint tenancy is severed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens when one joint tenant dies?", "answer": "The surviving joint tenant becomes the sole owner of the interest that the two of them had previously held jointly and can convey the property without joinder of any other person in the conveyance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "In a joint tenancy, what portion of the property is subject to a mortgage if one tenant takes out a mortgage?", "answer": "Only the mortgagor's interest (i.e., a 1/2 interest) is subject to the mortgage."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who could hold a tenancy of the entirety at common law?", "answer": "At common law, only validly married couples could hold a tenancy of the entirety."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a person tries to buy property as tenants in common and forges the other person's name on the conveyance?", "answer": "The share will be vested in the grantor, not the other tenant in common, because forgery does not transfer title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What does the doctrine of retaliatory eviction protect tenants from?", "answer": "The doctrine of retaliatory eviction protects tenants from being evicted simply because they assert their legal rights protected by the implied warranty of habitability. If a tenant makes a good-faith complaint regarding the habitability of the premises, many states presume a retaliatory motive if the landlord attempts to evict or penalize the tenant within a defined period of time after the tenant exercises these rights. These protections cannot be contracted away in the lease, and the burden of proof is on the landlord to show that the eviction was not retaliatory."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a landlord elects to holdover a tenant who has wrongfully stayed on past the conclusion of the original lease?", "answer": "The tenant becomes a periodic tenant with the period measured by the way the rent is tendered. If the landlord later elects to terminate this holdover periodic tenancy, the landlord must give the tenant notice at least equal to the length of the period itself."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a landlord have a cause of action against a sublessee under the common law?", "answer": "No. Under the common law, a landlord has no cause of action against a sublessee because there is no privity of contract or privity of estate between them. The subtenant is only liable to the original tenant, and the landlord can sue only the original tenant."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the American view of a tenant's right of possession regarding a landlord's duties?", "answer": "Under the American view, a landlord has fulfilled his duties once he provides the tenant with legal possession of the leased premises. The landlord does not have to put the tenant in actual possession."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a written lease provides that the landlord is entitled to the entire condemnation award in the event of an eminent domain proceeding, is the tenant entitled to share in the award?", "answer": "No. If a written lease provides that the landlord is entitled to the entire condemnation award in the event of an eminent domain proceeding, the tenant is not entitled to share in the award even if the tenant's possessory interest substantially exceeded the tenant's obligation under the lease."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a tenant transfers all or some of the leased premises to another for the remainder of the lease term, retaining no interest in the assigned premises?", "answer": "It is a proper assignment, although the tenant remains liable on the contract/lease."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a lease prohibits assignment but the tenant transfers exclusive use of the leased property to another for the remainder of the lease term?", "answer": "This is an assignment and a violation of the lease."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a landlord enforce a claim for rent against a sublessee if the tenant sublets the premises?", "answer": "No. If a tenant sublets the premises, the landlord can only enforce a claim for rent against the tenant because there is no privity of estate between a landlord and a sublessee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a Tenancy at Sufferance?", "answer": "Under a Tenancy at Sufferance, if the tenant has wrongfully held over past the expiration of the lease, the tenant has a leasehold estate to permit the landlord to recover rent. The tenancy at sufferance lasts only until the landlord either evicts the tenant or elects to hold the tenant to a new lease term."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How does the common law view lease provisions limiting assignment or subletting?", "answer": "Under the common law, lease provisions limiting assignment or subletting are a restraint on the free alienation of land, are not favored by the law, and are to be strictly construed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a landlord terminate a periodic lease or deny a lease renewal because the tenant asserted his right to habitable premises?", "answer": "No. Under the doctrine of retaliatory eviction, a landlord may not terminate a periodic lease or deny a lease renewal because the tenant asserted his right to habitable premises."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a non-assignment clause in a lease give a co-tenant the right to sue if another co-tenant assigns his interest?", "answer": "No. If there is a non-assignment clause in a lease, a co-tenant assigning his interest does not give the other co-tenants a right to sue."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What can a landlord do if the occupier is a licensee rather than a tenant?", "answer": "If a landlord can show that the occupier is a licensee rather than a tenant, the landlord can institute a cause of action to gain immediate possession of the premises without notice to the occupier."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to the landlord-tenant relationship if the entire premises are taken in condemnation?", "answer": "Unless the entire premises are taken in condemnation and the tenant gets an appropriate portion of any condemnation award, the landlord-tenant relationship is unaffected by the condemnation, and the tenant is obligated to continue paying rent."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a writing stating that you will accept rent from the assignee instead of the assignor be regarded as a novation?", "answer": "Yes. A writing stating that you will accept rent from the assignee instead of the assignor may be regarded as a novation that releases the assignor from liability because it indicates the acceptance of the new tenant in place of the original one."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A tenant needs an assistance animal to reduce diagnosed depression. Must the landlord permit the pet even if pets are not allowed in the building?", "answer": "Yes. The landlord must permit the pet because it is a reasonable accommodation for the tenant's disability under the Fair Housing Act."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a landlord refuse to sell or lease housing to a person who has a physical or mental disability under the Fair Housing Act?", "answer": "No. A landlord cannot refuse to sell or lease housing to a person who has a physical or mental disability under the Fair Housing Act because it prohibits discrimination based on disability."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the Fair Housing Act apply to owner-occupied buildings under 4-units?", "answer": "No. The Fair Housing Act does not apply to owner-occupied buildings under 4-units because it exempts these smaller buildings from its requirements."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Must landlords agree to reasonable accommodation requests if the disability claim is true and does not create a hardship on the landlord or other tenants under the Fair Housing Act?", "answer": "Yes. Landlords must agree to reasonable accommodation requests if the disability claim is true and does not create a hardship on the landlord or other tenants because the Fair Housing Act requires such accommodations."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What laws govern the transfer of real property or a contract for the sale of real property?", "answer": "The laws of the state where the real property is located will govern because the law of situs controls issues of conveyance, title, and validity of subsequent transfers."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A landlord states a racial or gender preference in an advertisement for a house he is renting. Is this allowed if his motives are innocent?", "answer": "No. A landlord cannot state a racial or gender preference in an advertisement for a house he is renting because it violates the Fair Housing Act, regardless of the landlord's motives."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the Fair Housing Act prohibit discriminatory advertising for the sale or rental of real property?", "answer": "Yes. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discriminatory advertising for the sale or rental of real property because it strictly prohibits ads that state a preference, discrimination, or limitation based on protected classes."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a right of first refusal to a 'grantee, his heirs and assigns' violate the Rule Against Perpetuities under common law?", "answer": "Yes. A right of first refusal to a 'grantee, his heirs and assigns' violates the Rule Against Perpetuities under common law because it creates an interest that is void at the time of its creation."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is the trend of modern decisions to avoid applying the Rule Against Perpetuities to commercial transactions in land?", "answer": "Yes. The trend of modern decisions is to avoid applying the Rule Against Perpetuities to commercial transactions in land by reading a reasonable time limit into the transaction or holding that the policies behind RAP would not be advanced by applying it."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a court interpret a devise of 'my entire estate' to include the devisee's Power of Appointment?", "answer": "Yes. A court may interpret a devise of 'my entire estate' to include the devisee's Power of Appointment because it can be construed as encompassing all the property interests of the testator."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a conveyance with a restriction on the use of land that gives the grantor a power of termination violate the Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "Yes. A conveyance with a restriction on the use of land that gives the grantor a power of termination violates the Rule Against Perpetuities because it creates a future interest that may not vest within the required period."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are class gifts to a testator's children or grandchildren in a will valid under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "Yes. Class gifts to a testator's children or grandchildren in a will are valid under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities if all interests vest or fail within a life in being at the testator's death plus twenty-one years."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are class gifts to grandchildren that take effect when the grandchildren reach age 21 valid in inter vivos conveyances under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "No. Class gifts to grandchildren contingent upon reaching age 21 are generally invalid under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities in inter vivos conveyances because the interest in the property may not vest within the permissible time frame. The Rule requires that any interest in property must vest, if at all, no later than 21 years after the death of some life in being at the creation of the interest. Since a grandchild could be born after the settlor's death and not reach age 21 until many years later, the vesting of the interest is uncertain and could potentially extend indefinitely, violating the Rule."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When must all interests created under a will vest or fail under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "All interests created under a will must vest or fail within a life in being plus twenty-one years under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities because the rule applies to ensure interests vest within a reasonable period."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "In a conveyance from A to 'B, her heirs and assigns, so long as the premises are used for residential purposes, then to C and his heirs,' is C's interest valid under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "No. C's interest is void under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities because it creates a future interest that may not vest within the required period."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a deed restricting ownership or occupancy to persons at least 21 years old in a family-oriented community be considered a violation of the equal protection clause?", "answer": "Yes. A deed restricting ownership or occupancy to persons at least 21 years old in a family-oriented community may be considered a violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it discriminates based on age."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a first right of refusal fall within the Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "Yes. A first right of refusal falls within the Rule Against Perpetuities because it creates a future interest that must vest or fail within the period prescribed by the rule."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a right of first refusal to repurchase property in a deed valid if the right to purchase will vest or fail within the period prescribed by the Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "Yes. A right of first refusal to repurchase property in a deed is valid if the right to purchase will vest or fail within the period prescribed by the Rule Against Perpetuities because it satisfies the rule's requirements."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a conveyance of land by deed 'to G, but if H is living 40 years from now, then to H' valid under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities?", "answer": "Yes. A conveyance of land by deed 'to G, but if H is living 40 years from now, then to H' is valid under the common law Rule Against Perpetuities because the interest will vest, if at all, within a life in being."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a Fee Simple Determinable use language such as 'so long as' or 'until'?", "answer": "Yes. A Fee Simple Determinable uses language such as 'so long as' or 'until' where the estate automatically reverts to the grantor upon the violation of the condition."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the Rule Against Perpetuities apply to a Fee Simple Determinable?", "answer": "No. The Rule Against Perpetuities does not apply to a Fee Simple Determinable because there is no interest in a third person."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a right of first refusal to buy land violate the Rule Against Perpetuities if it vests during a measuring life's lifetime?", "answer": "No. A right of first refusal to buy land does not violate the Rule Against Perpetuities if it vests during a measuring life's lifetime because it satisfies the rule's requirements."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the Rule Against Perpetuities apply to options to purchase where the one who holds the option is the current lessee?", "answer": "No. The Rule Against Perpetuities does not apply to options to purchase where the one who holds the option is the current lessee because the interest is considered vested."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is privity of estate needed to enforce an equitable servitude?", "answer": "No. Privity of estate is not needed to enforce an equitable servitude because it is enforced as an equitable property interest in the land itself."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O subdivides a vacant lot into 2 parcels and conveys one lot to A with a covenant in the deed specifying that only residential homes can be constructed. A later conveys to B without mentioning the covenant. Is B subject to the equitable servitude?", "answer": "Yes. B is subject to the equitable servitude because he had constructive notice of it through the recorded deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the requirements for an equitable servitude to run with the land?", "answer": "An equitable servitude runs with the land and is enforceable against anyone who possesses the burdened parcel if: (1) the original parties intended it; (2) the servitude touches and concerns the land; and (3) the subsequent purchaser has actual or constructive notice of the covenant."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the four elements required for an equitable servitude to bind a successor?", "answer": "The four elements required for an equitable servitude to bind a successor are: (1) the servitude must be included in writing in the original conveyance; (2) the original parties must have intended for the servitude to run with the land; (3) the servitude must touch and concern the land; and (4) the new owner must have either actual, constructive, or inquiry notice of the servitude."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the main difference between an equitable servitude and a real covenant?", "answer": "The main difference between an equitable servitude and a real covenant is that the remedy for a breach of a real covenant is money damages, while the remedy for a breach of an equitable servitude is injunctive relief."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Will a party usually want specific performance or some other type of injunctive relief when seeking enforcement of an equitable servitude?", "answer": "Yes. A party will usually want specific performance or some other type of injunctive relief when seeking enforcement of an equitable servitude because the remedy for a breach is injunctive relief."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a conveyance be enforceable against the grantee if the grantor only signs the writing?", "answer": "Yes. A conveyance can be enforceable against the grantee if the grantor only signs the writing because it satisfies the statute of frauds."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is required for an equitable servitude to be valid?", "answer": "An equitable servitude is valid if there is: (1) a writing satisfying the statute of frauds; (2) the original party intended to bind the grantee's heirs and assigns; (3) it touches and concerns the land; and (4) there is notice to subsequent grantees in the form of actual, inquiry, or record notice."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a landowner sells a portion of his property but places a valid restrictive covenant on the property being sold, can the landowner later enforce a violation of the covenant?", "answer": "Yes. The landowner can later enforce a violation of the covenant because RAP does not apply to covenants."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a restrictive covenant placed on property by the grantor after the grantor conveyed the property be binding?", "answer": "No. A restrictive covenant placed on property by the grantor after the grantor conveyed the property is not binding because it was not part of the original conveyance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can other grantees burdened by the same covenant bring suit to enforce the covenant?", "answer": "Yes. Other grantees burdened by the same covenant can bring suit to enforce the covenant because they share the same property interest affected by the covenant."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a covenant in a deed run with the land even if it is not mentioned in subsequent deeds?", "answer": "Yes. A covenant in a deed runs with the land even if it is not mentioned in subsequent deeds because the covenant is attached to the property itself."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can an equitable servitude be enforced against any subsequent owner of the land even if it wasn't in the deed to the current owner?", "answer": "Yes. An equitable servitude can be enforced against any subsequent owner of the land even if it wasn't in the deed to the current owner so long as it was in a deed in the chain of title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a negative equitable servitude be implied from a common scheme for the development of a residential subdivision?", "answer": "Yes. A negative equitable servitude may be implied from a common scheme for the development of a residential subdivision so long as the landowners have notice of the agreement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a negative covenant be enforced if it is implied by a common scheme of development?", "answer": "Yes. A negative covenant can be enforced if it is implied by a common scheme of development that was advertised as such or planned as such."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Will a negative covenant be enforced if there is no evidence a common building or development scheme was established for the entire subdivision?", "answer": "No. A negative covenant will not be enforced if there is no evidence a common building or development scheme was established for the entire subdivision."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Will a negative covenant be enforced against a new part of a subdivision if there is evidence that a common building or development scheme was established for the entire subdivision?", "answer": "Yes. A negative covenant will be enforced against a new part of a subdivision if there is evidence that a common building or development scheme was established for the entire subdivision because it indicates the intent to apply the covenant uniformly."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a property owner obligated to adhere to a covenant if it does not change the value, use, or utility of the land?", "answer": "No. A property owner is not obligated to adhere to a covenant if it does not change the value, use, or utility of the land because the covenant does not touch and concern the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a covenant be created to require lot owners in a development to pay annual dues for the maintenance of the property?", "answer": "Yes. A covenant can be created to require lot owners in a development to pay annual dues for the maintenance of the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an example of an affirmative covenant?", "answer": "An example of an affirmative covenant is a covenant that requires lot owners in a development to pay annual dues for the maintenance of the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a covenant that requires the payment of money in installments over an indefinite period be enforced by the courts?", "answer": "No. A covenant that requires the payment of money in installments over an indefinite period may not be enforced by the courts because of the burden imposed on the future owners of the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a restrictive covenant in a prior deed that is not contained in a later deed still valid?", "answer": "Yes. A restrictive covenant in a prior deed that is not contained in a later deed is still valid as it runs with the land and can be enforced against those who should be on inquiry notice."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a restrictive covenant in a deed be enforced in a court of law?", "answer": "Yes. A restrictive covenant in a deed runs with the land and can be enforced in a court of law."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are courts divided on whether an affirmative covenant to pay money touches and concerns the burdened property?", "answer": "Yes. Courts are divided as to whether an affirmative covenant to pay money (other than rent) touches and concerns the burdened property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can an equitable servitude be enforced by a successor to the original parties without consideration of privity?", "answer": "Yes. An equitable servitude can be enforced by a successor to the original parties without consideration of privity, so long as the servitude: (1) touches and concerns the land; (2) was intended by the parties to bind the successors; and (3) the party burdened had notice of the servitude."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an equitable servitude?", "answer": "An equitable servitude is a restriction on the use of land enforceable in a court of equity. It is more than a covenant because it is an interest in the land itself."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A and B own contiguous tracts of real property. A agrees to sell B an easement appurtenant through A's property for use as a single-lane road. Who acquires the easement?", "answer": "B would acquire an easement by express grant, and the easement automatically passes to the next owner of the dominant estate."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an easement appurtenant?", "answer": "An easement appurtenant is an easement held by a person as the owner of land that benefits from the easement. It benefits another land and the owner of that land, not simply another person. It can only be granted to owners of neighboring or nearby property, and it runs with the land, binding and benefiting subsequent owners even if they were not the original contracting parties and have no direct privity of contract."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A conveys an easement over his land to his neighbor B by deed of gift. The deed is silent as to the easement's location, but B uses a 10-foot strip along the north side of A's land for access. What happens to the easement's location?", "answer": "B's use of the easement fixed the location of the easement, meaning any relocation of the easement requires A's permission."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can the owner of the servient estate locate the precise right-of-way when the exact location of an easement is not specified?", "answer": "Yes. The owner of the servient estate has the right to locate the precise right-of-way in a reasonable manner when the exact location of an easement is not specified. Once the location of the right-of-way is established, it becomes fixed and cannot be moved without the consent of the owners of the servient and dominant estate."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A owns a lot in fee simple and has a right of way easement across land B owns in fee simple. B later sells his land to A. What happens to the easement?", "answer": "The easement is extinguished, so if A later sells the parcel over which he once enjoyed the right of way, the easement is not reinstated automatically, and A must start from scratch to re-create it."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the merger doctrine, when is an easement extinguished?", "answer": "An easement is extinguished under the merger doctrine when title to the easement and title to the servient land become vested in the same person, and the duration of the servient tenement is equal to or longer than the duration of the dominant tenement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "For an easement by necessity, does it matter whether the grantor's retained parcel or the grantee's parcel is landlocked?", "answer": "No. It does not matter as long as the easement by necessity meets the requirement of prior unity and necessity arising at severance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When can an easement by necessity be obtained over a land-locking parcel?", "answer": "An easement by necessity may be obtained over a land-locking parcel when there was prior unity of the tracts, and the necessity arose at the time of the severance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A servient estate blocks an access easement with a fence. Is this allowed?", "answer": "No. The servient estate cannot block an access easement with a fence."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can the owner of the servient estate impair, frustrate, or obstruct the right of the dominant estate to use the easement?", "answer": "No. The owner of the servient estate cannot impair, frustrate, or obstruct the right of the dominant estate to use the easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the mere non-use of an easement result in its destruction?", "answer": "No. The mere non-use of an easement does not result in its destruction."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is an easement of infinite duration unless limited by conditions in the grant?", "answer": "Yes. An easement is of infinite duration unless limited by conditions in the grant. An appurtenant easement is automatically transferred with the dominant estate."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A farmer spends substantial money and effort each year to build and maintain a building within a one-acre parcel owned by his neighbor after receiving oral permission to use the land. The neighbor's son later inherits the land and revokes his permission. What happens?", "answer": "The court will find for the farmer because an irrevocable license or an equitable easement was created when the farmer expended significant investments and efforts in reliance on the oral license, and the son, as the farmer's heir, is estopped from revoking the license."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can an oral license become irrevocable?", "answer": "Yes. An oral license can become irrevocable if the licensee expends substantial time or money into the property in reliance on the grantor's oral representation, as the licensor will be estopped from revoking the license, making it equivalent to an affirmative easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is an oral license a revocable privilege?", "answer": "Yes. An oral license is a revocable privilege."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does openly using part of a neighbor's land for a footpath for more than 10 years without interruption result in a prescriptive easement?", "answer": "Yes. Openly using part of a neighbor's land for a footpath for more than 10 years without interruption results in a prescriptive easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If the use of a footpath was exclusive, what could it result in?", "answer": "If the use of a footpath was exclusive, it could result in adverse possession of the footpath."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a landowner use, impound, or dam any diffuse surface water on his own property?", "answer": "Yes. A landowner can use, impound, or dam any diffuse surface water on his own property, so long as the landowner does not maliciously waste water to the detriment of a neighbor."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a landowner's oral or written permission for another to use his land a license that can generally be revoked at any time?", "answer": "Yes. A landowner's oral or written permission for another to use his land is a license that can generally be revoked at any time."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does buying season tickets to a sporting arena create a license to enter into the sporting arena that is revocable at will?", "answer": "Yes. Buying season tickets to a sporting arena creates a license to enter into the sporting arena that is revocable at will."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is an adjacent landowner liable for subsidence that would have occurred to the neighboring parcel in an unimproved condition?", "answer": "No. An adjacent landowner is only liable for subsidence that would have occurred to the neighboring parcel in an unimproved condition."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does visible use of an easement by the dominant owner give a subsequent purchaser actual notice of that easement?", "answer": "Yes. Visible use of an easement by the dominant owner gives a subsequent purchaser actual notice of that easement, and they will take subject to the easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "For an express easement, is the existence of a road being used in accordance with the easement sufficient to establish the location of the easement?", "answer": "Yes. For an express easement, the existence of a road being used in accordance with the easement is sufficient to establish the location of the easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a development plan that will dedicate a road to a municipality as a public street give adjacent landowners private easements by implication?", "answer": "No. A development plan that will dedicate a road to a municipality as a public street does not give adjacent landowners private easements by implication. Adjacent landowners can only have access once the road is public."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a profit a prendre?", "answer": "A profit a prendre is a non-possessory interest in land giving the holder the right to take natural resources. It is a property right protected by the due process clause, and the owner of a profit a prendre is entitled to compensation if the property is condemned."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If A has a valid easement over O's land, can O be reimbursed for any damages to the improved land over the easement area if A was acting within the scope of the easement?", "answer": "No. O cannot be reimbursed for any damages to the improved land over the easement area if A was acting within the scope of the easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a right-of-way easement created by express grant extinguished if the need for the easement no longer exists?", "answer": "\nNo. A right-of-way easement created by express grant is not extinguished if the need for the easement no longer exists. Easements by express grant remain in effect until terminated by agreement, abandonment, merger, or other legal means."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a right-of-way easement whose scope is initially undefined be regarded as defined by the initial use of the easement by the dominant estate?", "answer": "Yes. A right-of-way easement whose scope is initially undefined can be regarded as defined by the initial use of the easement by the dominant estate."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can O get an injunction to stop A from maintaining a valid easement over O's land if O has improved the land over the easement?", "answer": "No. O cannot get an injunction to stop A from maintaining the easement, even if O has improved the land over the easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If an easement is in the chain of title but not mentioned in a deed, is the owner on record notice of it?", "answer": "Yes. Even if a deed does not mention an easement, if the easement is in the chain of title, the owner is on record notice of it."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can an adjacent landowner erect a building that will obstruct the land owner's view if the land owner does not possess an easement for light, air, or view?", "answer": "Yes. An adjacent landowner can erect a building that will obstruct the land owner's view unless zoning or building regulations say otherwise."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can you acquire an easement by prescription if you have permission to use a road?", "answer": "No. If you have permission to use a road, you cannot acquire an easement by prescription, which requires adverse possession elements."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If both parties are using an easement, how will repair costs be handled?", "answer": "If both parties are using the easement, the court will apportion repair costs."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who has the duty to maintain an easement?", "answer": "The owner of an easement (dominant tenement) has the duty to maintain the easement and will be liable if failure to maintain it causes unreasonable interference with the use of the servient tenement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is the owner of a servient estate ordinarily obligated to repair or maintain an easement?", "answer": "No. Ordinarily, the owner of a servient estate is not obligated to repair or maintain an easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When is the expense of maintaining a road, driveway, or right-of-way apportioned between dominant and servient owners?", "answer": "The expense of maintaining a road, driveway, or right-of-way is apportioned between dominant and servient owners when both use the easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a beneficial easement that is visible or known to the buyer constitute an encumbrance?", "answer": "No. A beneficial easement that is visible or known to the buyer does not constitute an encumbrance, so marketable title is not affected."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Do the benefits of an easement appurtenant pass with transfers of the benefited land, regardless of whether the easement is mentioned in the conveyance?", "answer": "Yes. The benefits of an easement appurtenant pass with transfers of the benefited land, regardless of whether the easement is mentioned in the conveyance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a person grant an easement that lasts only a few years?", "answer": "Yes. A person can grant an easement that lasts only a few years."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is the owner of a profit entitled to compensation in a condemnation proceeding even if the profit is non-exclusive?", "answer": "Yes. The owner of a profit is entitled to compensation in a condemnation proceeding even if the profit is non-exclusive because a profit is still an interest in land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the expanded use of an easement terminate it?", "answer": "No. The expanded use of an easement does not terminate it."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are window air-conditioning units, lawn mowers, and throw rugs considered fixtures?", "answer": "No. Window air-conditioning units, lawn mowers, and throw rugs are not considered fixtures."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are typical examples of fixtures?", "answer": "Typical fixtures include stoves, cabinets, ceiling fans, dishwashers, fireplaces, and wall-to-wall carpeting."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a fixture?", "answer": "A fixture is any personal property that is so closely associated with real property due to annexation, adaptation, or the intent of the parties that it is regarded as real property. Once an item becomes classified as a fixture, ownership of the item passes to the owner of the real estate, no matter who owned it before it became a fixture."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are trade fixtures?", "answer": "Trade fixtures are items of personal property used by a tenant in a trade or business that have been affixed to the real estate in such a manner that the law would ordinarily treat them as personal property. A tenant is generally entitled to remove trade fixtures upon the termination of a lease, including periodic tenancies created after a tenant holds over."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are custom drapes designed and made specifically to match the decor of a room considered fixtures?", "answer": "Yes. Custom drapes designed and made specifically to match the decor of a room are considered fixtures."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are items customized to fit into or onto real property considered fixtures?", "answer": "Yes. Items customized to fit into or onto real property, such as window screens or storm shutters, are considered fixtures even though they could easily be removed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a tenant remove chattels once they are deemed to be fixtures?", "answer": "No. A tenant cannot remove chattels once they are deemed to be fixtures, unless: (1) the landlord gives the tenant permission in writing to remove the fixtures; or (2) the chattel is a trade fixture brought to the premises by the tenant for use in the tenant's particular business or trade."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a tenant leases a commercial property and receives oral permission from the landlord to install fixtures such as counters, display cases, shelving, and special lighting, can the tenant remove these trade fixtures?", "answer": "Yes. The tenant may remove these trade fixtures even if they are bolted to the floor, provided he restores the premises to its prior condition or pays for its restoration. A commercial tenant has the right to remove a trade fixture before the end of the lease as long as no substantial damage would result by its removal."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does personal property installed by a tenant that attaches to the rented real estate become a fixture if it was the intent of the parties that it remain the tenant's property?", "answer": "No. Personal property installed by a tenant that attaches to the rented real estate does not become a fixture if it was the intent of the parties that it remain the tenant's property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a perfected security interest in fixtures or goods have priority over a conflicting interest of an encumbrancer of real property?", "answer": "Yes. A perfected security interest in fixtures or goods has priority over a conflicting interest of an encumbrancer of real property if the security interest is perfected before the goods become fixtures and the fixtures are readily removable replacements of domestic appliances that are consumer goods."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If you have a security interest in windows and they are removable, can you take them back if the bank forecloses on the house?", "answer": "Yes. If you have a security interest in windows and they are removable, you can take them back if the bank forecloses on the house."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a restriction exists at the time of purchase, how do courts view the hardship?", "answer": "Where the restriction exists at the time of purchase, courts view the hardship as self-created hardship and will not grant the variance or zoning change."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If an owner subdivides his property into two separate parcels, one of which cannot be developed in accordance with zoning requirements, is he entitled to a variance for that parcel later?", "answer": "No. He is not entitled to a variance for that parcel later because the hardship is self-created."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a variance?", "answer": "A variance is an authorized deviation from strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance in an individual case. Parties are entitled to a variance if they will suffer undue hardship if they don't receive the variance and granting the variance will not result in harm to the public."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a nonconforming use be enlarged or changed to a different nonconforming use?", "answer": "No. A nonconforming use cannot be enlarged or changed to a different nonconforming use."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a nonconforming use be legislated out of existence by the use of an amortization period?", "answer": "Yes. A nonconforming use may eventually be legislated out of existence by the use of an amortization period, which acts as a grace period, putting owners on fair notice of the law and giving them a fair opportunity to recoup their investment."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a commercial area is rezoned to a residential area, can an existing commercial use continue in such a rezoned area?", "answer": "Yes. An existing commercial use may continue in such a rezoned area."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a nonconforming use?", "answer": "A nonconforming use is a use of property that was allowed under the zoning regulations at the time the use was established, but due to subsequent zoning changes, is no longer a permitted use. Once in place, a nonconforming use can continue and run with the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a zoning board grant a variance to a homeowner to permit a daycare service at her home located in an area recently zoned only for residential purposes?", "answer": "Yes. A zoning board may grant a variance to a homeowner to permit a daycare service at her home located in an area recently zoned only for residential purposes if the owner demonstrates that without the variance she will suffer an unnecessary hardship regarding the use of the land and nearby properties are already zoned for commercial purposes."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the purpose of a variance procedure?", "answer": "A variance procedure exists to grant waivers in particular instances when the person subject to the regulation demonstrates that the application of the regulation would create a substantial hardship or violate principles of fairness."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Do regulations that decrease the value of property need to promote an important public purpose and permit continued use of the property?", "answer": "Yes. Regulations that decrease the value of property must promote an important public purpose and permit continued use of the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a grantor conveys land to a town 'so long as it is used as a park,' and the town hasn't used the land as a park for 11 years, can the grantor or his heirs claim possession?", "answer": "No. The grantor or his heirs cannot claim possession because the town's fee simple determinable automatically came to an end, and with the town's possession being open, notorious, continuous, and adverse for the applicable 10-year period, any action by the grantor or his heirs is now barred by adverse possession."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When does a possibility of reverter become possessory?", "answer": "A possibility of reverter becomes possessory automatically when the determinable fee ends."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When does a right of entry require a positive act by the grantor to terminate the fee simple?", "answer": "A right of entry requires a positive act by the grantor to terminate the fee simple."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When does the statute of limitations begin to run for a right of entry?", "answer": "The statute of limitations for a right of entry begins to run when the grantor attempts to exercise the right and is rebuffed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When does the statute of limitations for adverse possession start running on the possibility of reverter?", "answer": "The statute of limitations for adverse possession starts running on the possibility of reverter as soon as the determinable fee ends."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If two persons act together to acquire title by adverse possession, what is their holding?", "answer": "If two persons act together to acquire title by adverse possession, they hold as tenants in common, not as joint tenants."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to the interest in the property when one of two adverse possessors dies?", "answer": "When one of two adverse possessors dies, his interest in the property goes to his heirs or devisees rather than the surviving adverse possessor."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A woman obtains title to land by adversely possessing the land for the required period. She feels remorse and then gives express oral waiver to the original owner of her claim to the land. Subsequently, she changes her mind and delivers to her son a validly executed deed. Who owns the land?", "answer": "The court will rule that the son now owns the land because an oral waiver of a claim without anything more, such as part performance, is insufficient to release the title to the original owner. The son properly succeeded to the woman's adverse possession title by privity of conveyance, which was in writing as required by the Statute of Frauds."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the woman need to sue the original owner in an action to quiet title if the adverse possession ripened?", "answer": "No. The woman need not sue the original owner in an action to quiet title since an adverse possession that ripened is sufficient to establish title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What does the Statute of Frauds require for a contract for the conveyance of real property?", "answer": "The Statute of Frauds requires that a contract for the conveyance of real property be in writing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What permits the enforcement of an oral land sale contract under the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "The part performance exception to the Statute of Frauds permits the enforcement of an oral land sale contract where the buyer takes possession and does some additional act such as making improvements or making payments on the contract."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A neighbor adversely possesses a piece of land by planting and harvesting crops on it, hunting on it, and parking cars on it for 24 of 25 years. The adverse possessor took a one-year vacation in Europe during the 7th year. Is the adverse possession valid?", "answer": "No. The adverse possession is interrupted, requiring the adverse possessor to start the clock all over again."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What does a claim for adverse possession require under the common law?", "answer": "A claim for adverse possession under the common law requires the possessor to establish that the character of the possession is hostile, actual and exclusive, open and notorious, and continuous for a period of 20 years."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What must be determined to establish if the use is continuous for adverse possession?", "answer": "To establish if the use is continuous for adverse possession, it must be determined whether the use is consistent with the type of property involved and if the average owner would use the property all year."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a person assert ownership and acquire title through a quiet title action if they adversely possess property through a tenant for ten years, including tacking?", "answer": "Yes. A person can assert ownership and acquire title through a quiet title action if they adversely possess property through a tenant for ten years, including tacking."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is the title of an adverse possessor marketable if the adverse possessor has not quieted title?", "answer": "No. If an adverse possessor has not quieted title, the title is unmarketable because it might cause a prospective purchaser to suffer litigation and possible loss."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if an adverse possessor satisfies the criteria for adverse possession?", "answer": "If an adverse possessor satisfies the criteria for adverse possession, the adverse possessor effectively gets title to the land after the statutory period expires."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If an adverse possessor transfers personal property on the land, does the adverse possessor still have title to the land?", "answer": "Yes. If an adverse possessor transfers personal property on the land, the adverse possessor still has title to the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who has priority in adverse possession?", "answer": "The first possessor has priority over subsequent possessors in adverse possession."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a plaintiff adversely possess a private-right-of-way?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff can adversely possess a private-right-of-way."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If you let your sister use the property while you go away for one year, does this create privity for tacking under adverse possession?", "answer": "Yes. Letting your sister use the property while you go away for one year creates privity for tacking under adverse possession."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What does tacking under adverse possession require?", "answer": "Tacking under adverse possession requires privity, which can result from contract or blood."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can one co-tenant bind another co-tenant to a boundary line agreement?", "answer": "No. One co-tenant cannot bind another co-tenant to a boundary line agreement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does an express or implied agreement between adjoining landowners to fix an uncertain or disputed boundary line have to be in writing?", "answer": "No. An express or implied agreement between adjoining landowners to fix an uncertain or disputed boundary line does not have to be in writing because the agreement is not a conveyance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When is an oral boundary line agreement valid?", "answer": "An oral boundary line agreement is valid so long as: (1) there is uncertainty on both sides as to the actual location of the boundary; and (2) there is either an express oral agreement fixing the boundary, or possession for a considerable period."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How is a deed procured by fraud in the execution treated?", "answer": "A deed procured by fraud in the execution is treated like a forgery, making it a void deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If A tricks O into signing a deed transferring O's property to A by telling him he is signing tax documents, is the deed void or voidable?", "answer": "The deed is void because this is the equivalent of a forged deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a deed procured by fraud voidable if the fraud is in the execution of the deed?", "answer": "Yes. A deed procured by fraud is voidable if the fraud is in the execution of the deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a deed procured by fraud voidable if the fraud is in the inducement?", "answer": "Yes. A deed procured by fraud is voidable if the fraud is in the inducement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a deed to a nonexistent or deceased grantee void?", "answer": "Yes. A deed to a nonexistent or deceased grantee is void and conveys no title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is the grantor's awareness of the grantee's nonexistence or death relevant to the validity of the deed?", "answer": "No. The grantor's awareness of the grantee's nonexistence or death is irrelevant, and title will remain in the grantor."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Must a grantee be alive at the time of delivery of the deed?", "answer": "Yes. A grantee must be alive at the time of delivery of the deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are express deed restrictions on sales/transfers considered total restraints on alienation?", "answer": "Yes. Express deed restrictions on sales/transfers are considered total restraints on alienation."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are total restraints on alienation of fee simple interests enforceable?", "answer": "No. Total restraints on alienation of fee simple interests are uniformly held void and unenforceable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If the restraint on alienation is limited in time, is it still considered void?", "answer": "Yes. If the restraint on alienation is limited in time, it is still considered void if it is a total restraint."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a deed be invalid if it is not delivered with the intent that it is presently operative?", "answer": "Yes. A deed must be delivered with the intent that it is presently operative, or it is invalid."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a grantor delivers a deed under which he reserves a right of retrieval and attaches to that delivery the condition that the deed is to become operative only after the grantor's death, is the deed valid?", "answer": "No. The grantor's actions are nothing more than an attempt to employ the deed as if it were a will, making it invalid."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If the grantor continues to use the property as if no transfer had occurred, is the deed valid?", "answer": "No. If the grantor continues to use the property as if no transfer had occurred, the deed is invalid because it was not delivered with the intent that it is presently operative."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A son sells a farm owned by his father to a friend using a full warranty deed. The son later inherits the farm after the father's death. Who will prevail in an action to quiet title?", "answer": "The friend will prevail in an action to quiet title under the doctrine of estoppel by deed because the grantor's title automatically passes to the grantee when the grantor subsequently acquires title, provided that the original deed is a warranty deed that asserts the quality of title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens under the Doctrine of Estoppel by Deed if an individual conveys an interest in land by a warranty deed but does not actually own the land until after the conveyance?", "answer": "The title is transferred automatically to the grantee when the grantor acquires it."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A landowner conveys his farm using a warranty deed to a corporation, but the corporation's charter of incorporation was never filed. Who owns the land?", "answer": "The deed is void and the landowner still owns the land because a valid deed must be properly executed and delivered, and a delivery to a nonexistent grantee such as a business entity not yet formed makes the deed void."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a deed convey title if it does not name an existing identifiable grantee?", "answer": "No. A deed does not convey title unless it names an existing identifiable grantee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a deed does not designate a grantee with reasonable certainty?", "answer": "A deed is not operative if the grantee is not designated with reasonable certainty and a deed which designates a person incapable of taking is void for want of a grantee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A mother executes a deed sufficient to create a joint tenancy with right of survivorship to her son and his wife. She mails him the deed with a letter that reads, \"You can have the house after my death. Don't record it until my death because I want to live here till I die.\" The wife records it anyway. Who owns the house?", "answer": "The court will find that the mother still owns the house in fee simple because the deed was not delivered as she still retained possession and title to the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a grantor delivers a deed and attaches a condition that the deed is to become operative only after the grantor's death?", "answer": "The grantor's actions are nothing more than an attempt to employ the deed as if it were a will, making it invalid."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is required for the delivery of a deed to be valid?", "answer": "A deed must be delivered with the intent that it is presently operative or it is invalid."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A man gives a deed to his house to his attorney with the instruction to deliver the deed to his friend upon his death, but reserves the power to take back the deed if he changes his mind. Does the death escrow succeed?", "answer": "No. The death escrow fails and the house goes to his intestate heir since he has failed to put the deed beyond his control."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is required to create a death escrow?", "answer": "To create a death escrow, the grantor must put the deed beyond his control, reserving no interest upon delivery."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a deed valid if it is properly delivered but never recorded or if the grantor later asks for the deed to be returned?", "answer": "Yes. A deed that is properly delivered is valid, even if the deed is never recorded or if the grantor later asks for the deed to be returned."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the requirements for a gift of real estate?", "answer": "A gift of real estate requires capacity of the grantor, intention of the grantor to make the gift, and completed delivery of a deed to the grantee (acceptance is presumed)."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is an executed deed that has not been delivered due to a condition precedent valid if recorded?", "answer": "No. An executed deed that has not been delivered due to a condition precedent is invalid, even if recorded."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is required for title to be conveyed?", "answer": "There must be an actual delivery of a deed for title to be conveyed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the validity of the conveyance of land by deed depend upon consideration being paid?", "answer": "No. The validity of the conveyance of land by deed does not depend upon consideration being paid, whether recited or not, and a gratuitous conveyance still transfers good title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the grantor of a warranty deed obligated to pay?", "answer": "The grantor of a warranty deed is only obligated to pay the costs that the grantee incurs defending title if the title is indeed defective."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What presumption is raised by the delivery of a deed to a third person for the benefit of a child?", "answer": "The delivery of a deed to a third person for the benefit of a child may raise a presumption of delivery to the child."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a grantee does not accept the delivery of a deed?", "answer": "If a grantee does not accept the delivery of a deed, title will not be transferred to the grantee and will remain with the grantor."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens when a dedication to a school is made and published?", "answer": "A dedication to a school and publishing the dedication creates title in the school."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a grantee of a deed sue the grantor for breach if the deed included covenants of general warranty and a cloud on title is subsequently discovered?", "answer": "Yes. A grantee of a deed can sue the grantor for breach if the deed included covenants of general warranty and a cloud on title is subsequently discovered."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What can be regarded as a dedication to public use of the streets shown on a development plan?", "answer": "The recording of the development plan can be regarded as a dedication to public use of the streets shown on the plan, provided that it can be shown a member of the public accepted the dedication."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If you give someone the authority to complete the terms of a deed, what happens to a previous oral understanding?", "answer": "A previous oral understanding may be rendered moot by the agency implied to complete the deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is the destruction of a deed sufficient to cause title to pass back to the grantor?", "answer": "No. Destruction of a deed is insufficient to cause title to pass back to the grantor. It must be properly executed, acknowledged, delivered, and accepted."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What will amount to common law dedication of land?", "answer": "Any evidence to indicate the donor's intention to dedicate land, and the subsequent acceptance by the public through use, will amount to common law dedication."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the presumption when a grantor retains physical possession of the deed?", "answer": "When a grantor retains physical possession of the deed, there is a presumption against delivery."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the presumption when a grantor transfers physical possession of the deed to the grantee?", "answer": "When a grantor transfers physical possession of the deed to the grantee, there is a presumption in favor of delivery."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a donee sue for damages for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment?", "answer": "No. A donee cannot sue for damages for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment because the donee received the property as a gift."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A deed to all church leaders will fail. Why?", "answer": "Grantees in a deed must be clearly identifiable and alive at the time of delivery of the deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who must be clearly identifiable and alive at the time of delivery of the deed?", "answer": "Grantees in a deed must be clearly identifiable and alive at the time of delivery of the deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to a deed that is forged or undelivered?", "answer": "A forged or undelivered deed is a nullity and will not transfer ownership of property even if the buyer is a bona fide purchaser."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If T wills Blackacre to A, and the residuary to B, and T then sells Blackacre and buys Whiteacre, who takes all?", "answer": "B takes all because the specific bequest of Blackacre was adeemed by extinction."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the doctrine of ademption?", "answer": "Under the doctrine of ademption, if a specifically devised/particularly named object of real or personal property is not in the testator's estate at the time of death, the gift is adeemed by extinction."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a validly executed will devises testator's land to his 3 grandchildren as a class gift without a survivorship requirement but a grandchild predeceases the testator and the grandchild has no issue, who takes the land in a state with an anti-lapse statute?", "answer": "The two surviving grandchildren will take the land since the state's anti-lapse statute saves a gift only if there is living issue by a predeceased devisee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a devisee fails to survive the testator but has no issue in a state with an anti-lapse statute?", "answer": "The interest will lapse."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a person bequeaths a specific piece of real property to his friend in a will, but the friend predeceases the testator?", "answer": "The friend's family is not entitled to the property when the testator dies because the specific gift has lapsed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If O sells numerous lots in a subdivision and imposes residential restrictions on some of them, but one Lot is sold without restrictions, and title to the Lot eventually passes to the defendant who begins building a convenience store on the land, will the owners of other lots in the subdivision be successful in suing the defendant to stop the building of the store?", "answer": "Yes. The owners of other lots in the subdivision will be successful because the defendant had constructive notice of the restrictions since the defendant was under a duty to check the title of neighboring lots due to the exclusively residential nature of the neighborhood."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What conditions must be met for restrictive covenants to bind subsequent purchasers of the land?", "answer": "Restrictive covenants will bind subsequent purchasers of the land as long as the original parties intended that the agreement will run with the land, and the subsequent purchaser had actual or constructive notice of the restriction."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What constitutes constructive (record) notice of a restriction for a subsequent purchaser?", "answer": "If the restriction appears in the purchaser's direct chain of title, this will be sufficient to place him on constructive (record) notice of the restriction."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Will a restriction recorded outside of the direct chain of title constitute constructive notice?", "answer": "No. A restriction recorded outside of the direct chain of title will not constitute constructive notice unless the purchaser had a duty to check the title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Do the recording statutes protect donees, heirs, or devisees?", "answer": "No. The recording statutes do not protect donees, heirs, or devisees unless the shelter rule applies."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who will win in a contest between two donees if the recording statutes do not protect creditors?", "answer": "The first grantee conveyed an interest will win since neither is considered a purchaser that is protected by the Recording Acts."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If O conveys by warranty deed to A, a BFP who does not record the deed or enter into possession, and later O conveys by quitclaim deed to B, another BFP who records and enters into possession with no notice of the O to A conveyance, and B later conveys to C who doesn't record but has notice of the O to A conveyance, whose title is superior in a Notice jurisdiction?", "answer": "C's title is superior to A's title in a Notice jurisdiction."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "In a Notice statute jurisdiction, who prevails over an unrecorded prior owner?", "answer": "A subsequent good faith purchaser for value prevails over an unrecorded prior owner so long as the subsequent purchaser did not have notice."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What does the Shelter Rule dictate in a Notice statute jurisdiction?", "answer": "The Shelter Rule dictates that the title of a 3rd party who takes from a subsequent purchaser without notice is superior to the title of the unrecorded prior owner."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How can you identify a race statute?", "answer": "If the statutory language contains the words \u201cthird parties\u201d, it is a race statute."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How can you identify a race-notice statute?", "answer": "If the statutory language contains the word \u201cfirst\u201d, it is a race-notice statute."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a company obtains a loan for $2 million from a bank that is secured by a mortgage on its warehouse, but the mortgage is not recorded, and then obtains a second loan for $1 million from a private investor that is unsecured, if the company defaults on the unsecured second loan and the investor obtains a court judgment and files a valid judgment lien, if the company then defaults on the first secured loan from the bank (which is then recorded, but was recorded after the investor's judgment), who can enforce its judgment lien on the warehouse under a pure notice recording statute?", "answer": "The investor can enforce its judgment lien on the warehouse under a pure notice recording statute over the bank's objection because the judgment lien was recorded before the mortgage, and the judgment creditor had no actual or record notice of the mortgage as required by the statute."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What are the three types of recording statutes?", "answer": "The three types of recording statutes (in order of frequency of testing) are notice, race-notice, and race."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens in a pure notice jurisdiction to an unrecorded conveyance or other instrument?", "answer": "In a pure notice jurisdiction, an unrecorded conveyance or other instrument is invalid as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser for value and without notice."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a mortgagee fails to record a mortgage on a property in a notice jurisdiction?", "answer": "A subsequent purchaser of the property will take free of the unrecorded mortgage, provided the buyer had no actual or constructive notice of the unrecorded mortgage."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What priority does a creditor who records a valid judgment lien have in a race notice jurisdiction?", "answer": "A creditor who records a valid judgment lien has priority over subsequent recorded/unrecorded mortgages or liens."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to a bona fide purchaser of real property for value and without notice of an unrecorded encumbrance?", "answer": "A bona fide purchaser of real property for value and without notice of an unrecorded encumbrance takes free of the encumbrance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to a forged release of a mortgage, even if properly recorded and notarized?", "answer": "A forged release of a mortgage is ineffective and will be set aside even if it was relied upon by a bona fide purchaser."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a creditor records a judgment after the owner sells the property but before the buyer records his deed in a jurisdiction that does not protect creditors?", "answer": "A creditor will not have a lien against the property in a jurisdiction that does not protect creditors."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who will be protected if a subsequent bona fide purchaser for value purchases without actual or record notice of a prior conveyance because the prior conveyance was not in the chain of title?", "answer": "A subsequent bona fide purchaser for value will be protected."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a deed that is voidable due to mistake or breach of fiduciary duty be set aside if the property has passed to a bona fide purchaser?", "answer": "No. A deed that is voidable due to mistake or breach of fiduciary duty can only be set aside if the property has not passed to a bona fide purchaser."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What determines who wins if a grantor conveys a property to two separate grantees?", "answer": "The grantee who wins depends on whether the first grantee's deed is deemed recorded in the second grantee's chain of title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is a method of governing the recording of deeds that determines priority of title?", "answer": "A method of governing the recording of deeds that determines priority of title as definitely as possible is to make time of recording the controlling factor."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What can be considered value in a conveyance?", "answer": "The full release of a debt can be considered value, but property received as a security interest for antecedent debt is insufficient."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if a subsequent bona fide purchaser purchases without actual or record notice of a prior conveyance and is the first to record?", "answer": "A subsequent bona fide purchaser will be protected if he purchases without actual or record notice of a prior conveyance, provided he is the first to record and purchased the property for value."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How is all authority under a power of attorney construed?", "answer": "All authority under a power of attorney is strictly construed so as to exclude the exercise of any unwarranted power."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What does a power of attorney to sell and convey real property include?", "answer": "A power of attorney to sell and convey real property is construed to include the power to execute the usual form of deed used to convey realty."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to an unrecorded conveyance in a Notice recording statute?", "answer": "An unrecorded conveyance is invalid as against a subsequent BFP for value and without notice."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Who wins in a Notice recording statute in the case of O to A then O to B?", "answer": "B wins."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under a Race-Notice recording statute, when is an unrecorded conveyance invalid?", "answer": "Under a Race-Notice recording statute, an unrecorded conveyance is invalid as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser (BFP) for value without notice who records first. The BFP is only protected if he records before the prior transferee or mortgagee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A gives a mortgage to B on March 10, and B records it on March 18. C buys from A on March 11 and records the deed on March 23. If B and C are both without notice, who wins under a race-notice statute?", "answer": "B wins under a race-notice statute."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When is a grantee charged with constructive notice of the contents of deeds of adjacent properties under the Collateral Document Rule?", "answer": "Under the Collateral Document Rule, a grantee is charged with constructive notice of the contents of deeds of adjacent properties when all of the properties are derived from a common grantor."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the Shelter Rule, when does a person who takes from a BFP prevail?", "answer": "Under the Shelter Rule, a person who takes from a BFP will prevail against any interest that the BFP would have prevailed against, even if the transferee has actual knowledge of the prior unrecorded interest."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A forged deed is relied upon by a bona fide purchaser. Does it transfer ownership of the property?", "answer": "No. A forged deed is a nullity and will not transfer ownership of property even if the buyer is a bona fide purchaser. Forged documents are ineffective to convey title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are forged documents effective to convey title even if properly recorded and notarized and relied upon by bona fide purchasers?", "answer": "No. Forged documents, even if properly recorded and notarized and relied upon by bona fide purchasers, are ineffective to convey title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A conveys to B but tells B to wait before recording. A then conveys to C who promptly records. B records later. C conveys to a BFP. Is B's recorded deed within the chain of title?", "answer": "No. B's recorded deed is outside the chain of title as far as the BFP is concerned because the deed was recorded late."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a deed is recorded late, is it within the chain of title?", "answer": "No. If a deed is recorded late, it is outside the chain of title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are bona fide purchasers protected by forgery?", "answer": "No. Bona fide purchasers are not protected by forgery."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If someone is living on the land, is a subsequent purchaser charged with notice?", "answer": "Yes. If someone is living on the land, a subsequent purchaser is charged with notice because a purchaser should check the land he is purchasing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Must a good faith purchaser be a purchaser for value?", "answer": "Yes. A good faith purchaser must be a purchaser for value. A purchaser is considered for value if they exchange a substantial sum for the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "You pay $50,000 for a property worth $100,000. Are you a purchaser for value?", "answer": "Yes. You are a purchaser for value if you pay $50,000 for a property worth $100,000 because a good faith purchaser must be a purchaser for value, which is satisfied by exchanging a substantial sum for the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Are donees protected by the recording statutes?", "answer": "No. Donees are not protected by the recording statutes and thus can be subject to a covenant even if they did not have notice."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A inherits property from O, who had obtained an owner's title insurance policy naming O as the insured. Does A have coverage under the owner's policy?", "answer": "Yes. A has coverage since heirs of an insured are deemed to have continued coverage under an owner's policy of title insurance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O obtains an owner's title insurance policy naming O as the insured. O later sells the property to A who does not buy title insurance. Does A have a claim against the title insurance purchased by O?", "answer": "No. A has no claim against the title insurance purchased by O because the policy only protects the person who owns it, not subsequent purchasers."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an owner's title insurance policy?", "answer": "An owner's title insurance policy is an agreement that the title insurance company will defend against and pay losses involved in any claim covered by the policy's terms, as long as the buyer or the buyer's heirs or devisees own an interest in the property. The policy protects only the person who owns it, not subsequent purchasers."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does an owner's policy of title insurance cover subsequent purchasers?", "answer": "No. The policy only covers immediate owners and does not run with the land to protect subsequent purchasers, meaning a later buyer must get his own title insurance policy."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A buyer of real property is successfully sued by a subsequent grantee on a title covenant he made in a warranty deed. Can the buyer recover from his owner's title insurance policy?", "answer": "Yes. The buyer may recover from his owner's title insurance policy if he is successfully sued by a subsequent grantee on a title covenant he made in a warranty deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does an owner's policy of title insurance continue to protect the owner if successfully sued on a title covenant in a future conveyance?", "answer": "Yes. An owner's policy of title insurance continues to protect the owner if successfully sued on a title covenant in a future conveyance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is an abstract company liable if they fail to uncover the existence of an easement in the chain of title?", "answer": "Yes. An abstract company is liable if they fail to uncover the existence of an easement in the chain of title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O conveys a life estate to A with remainder to B. A later conveys her interest to C as a fee simple absolute by warranty deed that is promptly recorded. B later transfers his remainder interest to A. Who now owns a fee simple absolute interest in the land?", "answer": "C now owns a fee simple absolute interest in the land due to the doctrine of estoppel by deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is the doctrine of estoppel by deed?", "answer": "The doctrine of estoppel by deed precludes individuals from arguing in court a position counter to what that person stated in a previous deed. It most frequently arises where someone deeded property they did not own, and later they are involved in a dispute involving that property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does the doctrine of estoppel by deed apply if a grantor does not have title at the time of conveyance but subsequently obtains title?", "answer": "Yes. If a grantor does not have title at the time of conveyance but subsequently obtains title, the doctrine of estoppel by deed applies and the grantor must then convey the property to the grantee."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a properly filed judgment becomes a lien on real property owned or subsequently acquired by the person against whom the judgment is rendered, does a lien exist if the judgment was filed after the property is sold?", "answer": "No. No lien will exist if the judgment was filed after the property is sold."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens if the co-tenant's title is foreclosed at a tax sale?", "answer": "Courts will find that a fiduciary obligation exists between the co-tenants. If one co-tenant buys the property at such a sale, the other co-tenants can acquire the same interest they previously held by promptly paying their contribution."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When does the After-Acquired Title Doctrine apply?", "answer": "The After-Acquired Title Doctrine applies when a person executes a deed purporting to convey an estate in land which he does not have or which is larger than he has, and then acquires this land, at which time title passes to the grantee by estoppel."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a judgment creditor a Bona Fide Purchaser?", "answer": "No. A judgment creditor is not a Bona Fide Purchaser."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a judgment lien run with the land?", "answer": "Yes. A judgment lien runs with the land and is binding on subsequent owners who have notice of it."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a lien is filed on the property of a co-tenant and a partition by judicial sale is performed, is the other co-tenant's interest affected?", "answer": "No. The lien only affects the portion of the proceeds of the indebted co-tenant and does not affect the other co-tenant's interest."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does a recorded contract trump a later filed judgment lien?", "answer": "Yes. A recorded contract (as opposed to a deed) trumps a later filed judgment lien."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a judgment places a lien on property owned or subsequently acquired in favor of the winner of the judgment, does a lien exist if it is filed after the property is sold?", "answer": "No. No lien will exist if the lien is filed after the property is sold."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "An agent finds a buyer who offers less than the seller's minimum sales price stated in the brokerage agreement. Is the agent entitled to a commission if the seller refuses to sell at the lower price?", "answer": "No. The agent is not entitled to a commission if the seller refuses to sell at the lower price, even if the difference is just $100. A real estate broker or agent earns their commission only when they produce a ready, willing, and able buyer who has made an offer conforming with the seller's reasonable requirements."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When does a real estate broker or agent earn their commission?", "answer": "A real estate broker or agent earns their commission when they produce a ready, willing, and able buyer who has made an offer conforming with the seller's reasonable requirements."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a real estate broker a fiduciary?", "answer": "Yes. A real estate broker is a fiduciary under an obligation of undivided service and loyalty to the principal and must act in the highest good faith toward the principal, precluding the broker from obtaining any advantage over the principal in any transaction."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Must a broker disclose if a prospective purchaser is a relative, employee, or partner of the broker?", "answer": "Yes. A broker must disclose if a prospective purchaser is a relative, employee, or partner of the broker, and no sale to or purchase from such persons may be concluded without the principal's full knowledge and consent."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "The seller finds that his brother is interested in purchasing the house and accepts the brother's offer within the listing period. Is the seller obligated to pay the broker the commission?", "answer": "Yes. The seller is obligated to pay the broker the commission even though the broker or agent did nothing to procure the buyer. Under an exclusive-right-to-sell listing agreement, a broker or agent is entitled to a commission if anyone (including the seller) procures a ready, willing, and able buyer during the listing period."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under an exclusive-right-to-sell listing agreement, is a broker or agent entitled to a commission if anyone procures a ready, willing, and able buyer during the listing period?", "answer": "Yes. Under an exclusive-right-to-sell listing agreement, a broker or agent is entitled to a commission if anyone (including the seller) procures a ready, willing, and able buyer during the listing period."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When a contract does not contain a time-of-the-essence clause, what is required to make time of the essence?", "answer": "When a contract does not contain a time-of-the-essence clause, the party seeking to make time of the essence must give reasonable notice, provide a clear, distinct, and unequivocal notification of an intent to perform, and fix a reasonable time within which the other party may perform before a default results. What is reasonable depends on the circumstances of each case."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a vendee who breaches a real estate contract without lawful excuse recover the down payment if the contract is silent about liquidated damages?", "answer": "No. A vendee who breaches a real estate contract without lawful excuse generally cannot recover the down payment if the contract is silent about liquidated damages. The seller may retain the entire down payment if the seller's actual losses exceed the amount of the earnest money."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can an executory contract for the sale or exchange of real estate be rescinded by mutual oral agreement?", "answer": "Yes. An executory contract for the sale or exchange of real estate may be rescinded by mutual oral agreement because the statute of frauds is held to apply only to the initial creation of the contract, and subsequent changes may be by mutual parol agreement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can real estate contracts, including option contracts, be assigned?", "answer": "Yes. Real estate contracts, including option contracts, can be assigned if there is no express provision against assignment. If the contract is validly assigned, the assignee is entitled to specific performance if the other party breaches."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A tenant sends an e-mail to his landlord that reads, 'I will buy your building for $100,000. Signed/Tenant's name.' The landlord sends an e-mail that reads, 'OK. Must close in 90 days. Signed/Landlord's name.' Can the tenant sue for specific performance if he tenders full payment but the landlord refuses to convey?", "answer": "Yes. The tenant can sue for specific performance because the email messages serve as a sufficient memorandum under the statute of frauds, which requires a contract for the sale of land to contain the parties identities, a sufficient description of the land, the parties intent to sell and buy, adequate signatures, and a price term."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What must a memorandum contain to constitute sufficient evidence of a contract for the sale of land?", "answer": "A memorandum must be in writing, signed by the party to be charged, identify the parties, state the price, and describe the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a buyer compel specific performance despite missing the exact closing date?", "answer": "Yes. In a land conveyance contract, the buyer can compel specific performance despite missing the exact closing date if there was no time of the essence clause or special circumstances."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A written contract for the sale of real property fails to adequately describe which specific part of the seller's 500-acre land is to be sold. The parties agree in writing to determine which part to sell before they perform the contract. Is the contract enforceable?", "answer": "No. The contract is still unenforceable as it fails to meet the statute of frauds which requires a sale of interest in land to be evidenced by one or more writings containing all the essential terms including the description of the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an essential element for a valid and enforceable real estate contract?", "answer": "An essential element for a valid and enforceable real estate contract is an accurate description of the real property to be conveyed. The description can be by street address, full legal description, reference to a public map, or by a plat attached to the contract, or a combination thereof."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A real estate contract contains a reasonable liquidated damages provision along with a time of the essence clause based on the earnest money deposit. The buyer fails to close on the scheduled closing date. Is this a material breach?", "answer": "Yes. This is a material breach and the seller may retain the earnest money deposit."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a buyer breaches the real estate contract, can the seller retain the buyer's earnest money deposit as liquidated damages?", "answer": "Yes. If a buyer breaches the real estate contract, the seller can retain the buyer's earnest money deposit as liquidated damages, provided it is a reasonable amount no higher than 10% of the sales price."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an exception to the Statute of Frauds for the transfer of an interest in land?", "answer": "The doctrine of part performance is an exception to the Statute of Frauds for the transfer of an interest in land. It requires proof that the buyer paid all or part of the purchase price and also either possessed the premises or constructed on the premises."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Must transfers of interests in land be in writing under the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. Generally, transfers of interests in land must be in writing under the Statute of Frauds, and proof of oral agreements is not allowed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a verbal agreement by tenants in common for the property to pass to the survivor if one of them dies valid?", "answer": "No. A verbal agreement by tenants in common for the property to pass to the survivor if one of them dies is invalid because the Statute of Frauds applies."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "In a contract to purchase or sell real estate, must the description of the property be sufficient to identify and locate the parcel of land?", "answer": "Yes. In a contract to purchase or sell real estate, the description of the property must be sufficient to enable the court to identify and locate the parcel of land definitely and with certainty, so a discrepancy in area is not fatal."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can the description of the property in a contract to purchase or sell real estate be vague?", "answer": "No. The description of the property in a contract to purchase or sell real estate cannot be vague. It must be sufficient to enable the court to identify and locate the parcel of land definitely and with certainty."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can the seller of real property enforce specific performance against a buyer who breaches?", "answer": "Yes. The seller of real property can enforce specific performance against a buyer who breaches."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is performing one day late a material breach if the contract is time of the essence?", "answer": "Yes. If a contract is time of the essence, performing just one day late is a material breach that excuses the other party's duty."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What is an Accord and Satisfaction?", "answer": "An Accord and Satisfaction is where one party to a contract agrees to receive a lesser performance than called for by the contract in order to avoid complete default or to resolve the dispute."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens when an accord is satisfied?", "answer": "An accord suspends the original obligation, which is discharged when the accord is satisfied. If the debtor breaches the accord, the creditor can sue under the original obligation."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "How can a time of the essence clause be phrased?", "answer": "A time of the essence clause can simply say, 'This Contract is null and void if not performed by a Certain Day.'"}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a party to a contract notify the other party at a later date that time is of the essence?", "answer": "Yes. A party to a contract can notify the other party at a later date that time is of the essence, and the other party must comply as long as notice is given a reasonable time prior to the date for performance."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What duty does a seller have in a land sale contract?", "answer": "In every land sale contract, the seller has a duty to convey marketable title to the buyer at closing unless the parties agree otherwise. A title is marketable if the seller has a fee simple, the title is free from any encumbrances, and the buyer is entitled to possession."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A right-of-way easement reduces the value of the property. Does it render title unmarketable?", "answer": "Yes. An encumbrance such as a right-of-way easement that reduces the value of the property renders title unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "The installation of utilities is an easement that is obviously visible and beneficial to the land. Does it render title unmarketable?", "answer": "No. An easement that is obviously visible and beneficial to the land, such as the installation of utilities, does not render title unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What circumstances render title unmarketable?", "answer": "The three circumstances that will render title unmarketable are adverse possession, encumbrances, and zoning violations. An encumbrance that reduces the value of the property renders title unmarketable, but an easement that is obviously visible and beneficial to the land does not render title unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A buyer agrees to buy undeveloped land for commercial purposes with the contract specifying a conveyance by a warranty deed without exceptions but fails to mention the quality of title. The buyer then discovers a restrictive covenant limiting the use of the land to residential purposes only. Can the buyer cancel the contract?", "answer": "Yes. The buyer may cancel the contract because the seller has a duty to transfer a marketable title at the time of closing, and an encumbrance such as a restrictive covenant that has not been waived or removed by the closing date makes the title unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is there an implied obligation to convey marketable title in a real estate contract?", "answer": "Yes. In the absence of an express agreement to the contrary, there is an implied obligation to convey marketable title in a real estate contract. The title does not have to be marketable until the closing date, although the buyer can waive his right to marketable title."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Does title have to be marketable before the closing date?", "answer": "No. Title does not have to be marketable until the closing date, meaning that mortgages or liens on the property can be paid off at the closing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a buyer waive his right to marketable title?", "answer": "Yes. A buyer can waive his right to marketable title, but the seller cannot."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can an easement on the property make the title unmarketable?", "answer": "Yes. An easement on the property can make the title unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a real estate contract is silent as to quality of title, is marketable title implied?", "answer": "Yes. If a real estate contract is silent as to quality of title, marketable title is implied."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A property has no access to a public right of way. If the buyer does not object prior to his acceptance of the deed, does the buyer have recourse against the seller?", "answer": "No. If a property has no access to a public right of way and the buyer does not object prior to his acceptance of the deed, the buyer has no recourse against the seller because even a warranty deed does not covenant against lack of access."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If title to a property is unmarketable, when must the buyer object?", "answer": "If title to a property is unmarketable, the buyer must object prior to his acceptance of the deed, because under the doctrine of merger, the deed then becomes the sole measure of the parties' rights and liabilities."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is title to property unmarketable if it is subject to a covenant or condition containing a right of re-entry or a possibility of reverter?", "answer": "Yes. If property being sold is subject to a covenant or condition containing a right of re-entry or a possibility of reverter, the title to the property is unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a buyer sue for unmarketable title under a contract theory after the deed is delivered and accepted?", "answer": "No. Even though marketable title is implied in a contract for the sale of land, after the deed is delivered and accepted, the buyer cannot sue for unmarketable title under a contract theory."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a vendor of real estate required to deliver marketable title before closing?", "answer": "No. A vendor of real estate is not required to deliver marketable title until closing, even in installment contracts where there is a lien on the property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Can a buyer refuse to accept a deed if the contract is 'subject to easements, covenants, and restrictions of record' and the seller burdens the property after contract with an easement?", "answer": "Yes. A buyer can refuse to accept a deed if the contract is 'subject to easements, covenants, and restrictions of record' and the seller burdens the property after contract with an easement."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a real estate title unmarketable if it contains substantial defects such as violations of zoning ordinances?", "answer": "Yes. A real estate title is unmarketable if it contains substantial defects such as violations of zoning ordinances which might cause a prospective purchaser to suffer litigation and possible loss."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a real estate title unmarketable if it contains governmental building restrictions?", "answer": "Yes. A real estate title is unmarketable if it contains governmental building restrictions which might cause a prospective purchaser to suffer litigation and possible loss."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Will a court imply an obligation to convey marketable title in a land sale contract if the contract is silent on this issue?", "answer": "Yes. In a land sale contract, an obligation to convey marketable title will be implied by the court if the contract is silent on this issue."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is title unmarketable if it is uncertain that a lot is subject to building restrictions?", "answer": "Yes. If it is uncertain that a lot is subject to building restrictions, the title is unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is title considered unmarketable if it is subject to an unreasonably burdensome risk of litigation?", "answer": "Yes. Title which is subject to an unreasonably burdensome risk of litigation is considered 'unmarketable'."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Do encroachments of a significant dimension make a property unmarketable?", "answer": "Yes. Encroachments of a significant dimension on the subject property or onto adjacent land make a property unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Do violations of zoning ordinances make a property title unmarketable?", "answer": "Yes. The violation of zoning ordinances makes a property title unmarketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is title marketable if there is no tangible proof that the property has been acquired by adverse possession?", "answer": "No. Absent tangible proof that the property has been acquired by adverse possession, title is not marketable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If one of the parties to a contract for the sale of land dies, how are their interests treated under the doctrine of equitable conversion?", "answer": "If one of the parties to a contract for the sale of land dies, under the doctrine of equitable conversion, the seller's interest is personal property and the buyer is treated as the owner of the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "O, owner of Blackacre, contracts to sell Blackacre to A for $10,000. Before closing, O dies intestate. By the applicable intestacy statute, B succeeds to O's real property and C succeeds to O's personal property. Who is entitled to the $10,000 when it is paid?", "answer": "C is entitled to the $10,000 when it is paid, and B takes nothing because under equitable conversion, the seller's interest is personal property and the buyer is treated as the owner of the land."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A seller's house burns down prior to closing and no one insured the house. Who bears the risk of loss?", "answer": "The buyer would have to pay the contract price because the risk of loss passes to the buyer when the contract is fully executed, even if the buyer does not take possession until the closing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, when does the risk of loss pass to the buyer?", "answer": "Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, the risk of loss passes to the buyer when the contract is fully executed, even if the buyer does not take possession until the closing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, when does the buyer become the equitable owner of the land?", "answer": "Upon the execution of the contract, the buyer becomes the equitable owner of the land and bears the risk of loss, unless there is a statute to the contrary."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If the seller dies before closing, how are the proceeds from the sale regarded under the principle of equitable conversion?", "answer": "The proceeds from the sale are regarded as personal property if the seller dies before closing, under the principle of equitable conversion."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the principle of equitable conversion, how do courts treat the signing of the contract?", "answer": "Under the principle of equitable conversion, courts treat the signing of the contract as vesting in the purchaser equitable ownership of the land. If the seller dies before closing, the proceeds from the sale are regarded as personal property."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the principle of equitable conversion, what happens if the contract has been executed and the buyer dies before closing?", "answer": "If the contract has been executed and the buyer dies before closing, the buyer's heirs may specifically enforce the agreement under the principle of equitable conversion."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a fire occurs prior to closing, who bears the risk of loss under the doctrine of equitable conversion?", "answer": "If a fire occurs prior to closing, the risk of loss falls on the buyer, even if the seller is in possession of the property at the time of the fire, unless the contract states otherwise."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "After a contract is signed, who is the owner of the land?", "answer": "After a contract is signed, the buyer is the owner of the land, subject to the condition that he pays for it at the closing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, if the seller dies after the contract is made but before closing, who receives the proceeds of the sale if the seller's will gives his personal property to A and his real property to B?", "answer": "A will receive the proceeds of the sale because equitable title is with the buyer, not B."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a buyer dies after signing the contract but before closing, can the buyer's heirs enforce the contract?", "answer": "Yes. If a buyer dies after signing the contract but before closing, the buyer's heirs can enforce the contract."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the majority view of equitable conversion, if the buyer dies, are the buyer's heirs entitled to specific performance?", "answer": "Yes. Under the majority view of equitable conversion, the buyer's heirs are entitled to specific performance (and not rescission), unless the buyer's existence was necessary for the performance of the contract."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If the seller dies before closing, how are the proceeds from the sale considered?", "answer": "If the seller dies before closing, the proceeds from the sale are considered the personal property of the seller."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a right of first refusal within the Statute of Frauds?", "answer": "Yes. A Right of First Refusal is within the Statute of Frauds and therefore must be in writing."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a seller discloses to the buyer that the house had been treated for termites but fails to disclose that permanent termite damage existed in the house, is the seller liable?", "answer": "Yes. If a seller discloses to the buyer that the house had been treated for termites but fails to disclose that permanent termite damage existed in the house, the seller will be found liable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "If a seller is unaware that the house is infested with termites, can the seller be found liable?", "answer": "No. If a seller is unaware that the house is infested with termites, the seller cannot be found liable."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Is a seller of real property liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects under the modern majority rule?", "answer": "Yes. Under the modern majority rule, a seller of real property is liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects, and 'As is' language will not protect a seller from tort claims based on nondisclosure of significant latent defects known to the seller."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "A seller inherits a house she has never seen and agrees to sell it 'As is' to a buyer. The buyer later discovers heavy termite damage in the house. Does the buyer have a claim against the seller?", "answer": "No. If a seller inherits a house she has never seen and agrees to sell it 'As is' to a buyer and conveys title to the buyer using a full warranty deed, if the buyer later discovers heavy termite damage in the house, the buyer has no claim against the seller since the house was sold 'As is' and the seller made no misrepresentations regarding the condition of the house."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "Under the modern majority rule, is a seller of real property liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects?", "answer": "Yes. Under the modern majority rule, a seller of real property is liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects, and 'As is' language will not protect a seller from tort claims based on nondisclosure of significant latent defects known to the seller."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "When a deed is accepted, what happens to the contract terms contained in the land sale agreement?", "answer": "When a deed is accepted, the contract terms that are contained in the land sale agreement will merge into the deed."}
{"topic": "Real Property", "question": "What happens to the implied contractual covenant to convey marketable title when the deed is accepted?", "answer": "The implied contractual covenant to convey marketable title is superseded by the doctrine of merger when the deed is accepted."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can an internet service provider be liable if they negligently provide services to their customers?", "answer": "Yes. An internet service provider may be liable if they negligently provide services to their customers."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a publisher that publishes information to the general public owe a duty to the public at large?", "answer": "No. A publisher or other information provider that publishes information to the general public owes no duty to the public at large because the relationship is highly attenuated."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a negligence action, what factors do courts analyze to determine whether a duty exists?", "answer": "In a negligence action, to determine whether a duty exists, courts analyze several factors, including the legal relationship between the parties, the foreseeability of injury, the likelihood of injury, and public policy considerations."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff's house burns down from a fire that appears to have started in his toaster oven. Is the store liable if this is the only evidence available?", "answer": "No. If a plaintiff's house burns down from a fire that appears to have started in his toaster oven, and this is the only evidence available in his negligence action against the store, the store can successfully move for summary judgment against the plaintiff since there is no evidence of negligence that can be attributed to the store."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a plaintiff's house burns down from a fire that appears to have started in his toaster oven, can the plaintiff resort to res ipsa loquitur if the store did not have exclusive control over the instrumentality?", "answer": "No. The plaintiff cannot resort to res ipsa loquitur if the store did not have exclusive control over the instrumentality."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff establish to make a prima facie case of negligence?", "answer": "In order to establish a prima facie case of negligence, a plaintiff must establish the existence of a duty owed by a defendant to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty, that such breach was a proximate cause of injury to the plaintiff, and damages suffered by the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A truck driver stops to help after A's car suffers a tire blowout and then gets hit by another speeding car. Can the negligent tire manufacturer be held liable for the truck driver's injuries?", "answer": "Yes. The negligent tire manufacturer can be held liable for the truck driver's injuries because the truck driver was not a professional rescuer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a tortfeasor owe a duty of care to a professional rescuer for injury sustained by the very negligence that occasioned the rescuer's presence?", "answer": "No. A tortfeasor does not owe a duty of care to a professional rescuer for injury that was sustained by the very negligence that occasioned the rescuer's presence and that was within the scope of the hazards inherent in the rescuer's duties."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the rescue doctrine, who is liable for the harm caused to a victim and a person injured while rescuing that victim?", "answer": "Under the rescue doctrine, if a tortfeasor creates a circumstance that places the tort victim in danger, the tortfeasor is liable not only for the harm caused to the victim, but also the harm caused to any person injured in an effort to rescue that victim."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A person with no history of kidney problems suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills. Can a jury conclude that the plaintiff was injured due to the pharmacist's negligence?", "answer": "Yes. If a person with no history of kidney problems suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills, a jury can reasonably conclude that the plaintiff would not have been injured but for the pharmacist's negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can circumstantial evidence be used to show that a defendant breached a duty of care in the absence of direct evidence of negligence?", "answer": "Yes. In the absence of direct evidence of negligence, circumstantial evidence (evidence of one fact from which another fact may be inferred) can sometimes be used to show that the defendant breached a duty of care if the claim is supported by sufficient circumstantial evidence to permit the inference of negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a person suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills, is the pharmacy liable under the theory of respondeat superior?", "answer": "Yes. The pharmacy, as the pharmacist's employer, is also liable under the theory of respondeat superior if a person suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff sues the federal government for killing his cows, and the trier of fact finds no evidence of negligence on the part of the federal government. Must the plaintiff's claim be dismissed?", "answer": "Yes. If the plaintiff sues the federal government for killing his cows, and the trier of fact finds no evidence of negligence on the part of the federal government, the plaintiff's claim must be dismissed."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a statute that makes the federal government liable only for negligence and no other torts constitutional?", "answer": "Yes. If a statute makes the federal government liable only for negligence and no other torts, the statute is constitutional."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a negligent tortfeasor generally liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties resulting from the tortfeasor's negligent conduct?", "answer": "No. A negligent tortfeasor is not generally liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties resulting from the tortfeasor's negligent conduct, unless the third party tortious or criminal acts were foreseeable by the tortfeasor."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When will a negligent tortfeasor be found liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties?", "answer": "A negligent tortfeasor will be found liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties if the third party tortious or criminal acts were foreseeable by the tortfeasor."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a medical professional's duty of care extend to non-patients?", "answer": "No. Unless a patient poses a threat to others, a medical professional's duty of care extends only to the patient, and non-patients will have no cause of action against the medical professional for the acts of the patient."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a person negligent if he has an unforeseen medical emergency while driving his car and he crashes into another vehicle?", "answer": "No. A person is not negligent if he has an unforeseen medical emergency (such as a heart attack) while driving his car and he crashes into another vehicle."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What duty does a defendant have to not act in a negligent or reckless manner?", "answer": "A defendant has a duty to not act in a negligent or reckless manner and is liable in tort if he fails to take reasonable steps to anticipate and prevent a plaintiff's injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If it is normal practice to consult with an expert, will a defendant be found negligent for breaching a duty of care by failing to consult with an expert?", "answer": "No. A defendant will not be found negligent for breaching a duty of care by failing to consult with an expert, unless it can be shown that the outcome would have been different if the expert was consulted."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a person who suffers a heart attack while driving hits a child, will the driver be found negligent?", "answer": "No. A person who suffers a heart attack while driving and hits a child will not be found negligent if the driver took reasonable care while driving and the heart attack was unforeseeable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is there a legal duty for a doctor to provide aid to an injured party if the doctor is not responsible for the injured party's condition?", "answer": "No. There is no legal duty for a doctor to provide aid to an injured party if the doctor is not responsible for the injured party's condition."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When might an individual have a legal duty to aid another person who is in immediate danger of serious harm?", "answer": "An individual may have a legal duty to aid another person who is in immediate danger of serious harm due to the individual's non-negligent conduct. This duty is greater than a duty to aid another person who is in immediate danger of serious harm due to a stranger's wrongful conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What does it mean when a defendant 'takes his plaintiff as he finds him'?", "answer": "A defendant 'takes his plaintiff as he finds him' and is liable even if the extent of the injury was not a foreseeable consequence of the negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A municipality fails to replace a traffic control device at a busy intersection within four days. An injury occurs as a result. Is the municipality negligent?", "answer": "Yes. The municipality is likely negligent because its failure to replace the traffic control device within a reasonable time frame, especially at a busy intersection, constitutes a breach of its duty to maintain safe road conditions. The standard of care for municipalities includes timely maintenance and repair of traffic control devices to prevent accidents and injuries."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a person be liable in tort solely on the grounds that he failed to render assistance?", "answer": "No. A person generally cannot be liable in tort solely on the grounds that he failed to render assistance."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a person negligent if a specific danger is imminent and patently foreseeable and he exposes the plaintiff to it anyway, resulting in injury?", "answer": "Yes. If a specific danger is imminent and patently foreseeable and a person exposes the plaintiff to it anyway, the person is negligent if an injury occurs."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a tortfeasor tries to warn the plaintiff but is unsuccessful and the plaintiff is injured by the tortfeasor's conduct, will the tortfeasor be found negligent?", "answer": "Yes. If a tortfeasor tries to warn the plaintiff but is unsuccessful and the plaintiff is injured by the tortfeasor's conduct, the tortfeasor will be found negligent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is there a duty to control the conduct of a third person?", "answer": "No. There is no duty to control the conduct of a third person, except in special relationships (for example: common carrier/passengers; innkeeper/guests; employer/employee; school/student; jailor/prisoner; landlord/tenant; or hospitals and therapists who are in charge of dangerous mental patients)."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A car owner is still liable if he injures someone because the car wouldn't stop, even if it was due to his mechanic putting defective brakes on the car. Is the car owner still liable?", "answer": "Yes. The car owner is still liable if he injures someone because the car wouldn't stop, even if it was due to his mechanic putting defective brakes on the car, because public policy makes certain duties nondelegable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does public policy make certain duties nondelegable?", "answer": "Yes. Public policy makes certain duties nondelegable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a defendant liable if the type of injury is foreseeable, even if the extent of the injury is unforeseeable?", "answer": "Yes. If the type of injury is foreseeable, then the defendant is liable even if the extent of the injury is unforeseeable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the question of whether a defendant has breached a duty to the plaintiff a question of fact to be determined by the jury?", "answer": "Yes. Whether a defendant has breached a duty to the plaintiff is a question of fact to be determined by the jury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A twelve-year-old boy is killed when his motorcycle collides with the defendant's car on the street. What standard of care will be applied to the boy's operation of the motorcycle?", "answer": "The boy's operation of the motorcycle will be held to the adult standard of a reasonably prudent person because the boy was engaged in an adult activity that was inherently dangerous."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are minors engaging in adult activities held to the adult standard of care?", "answer": "Yes. Children engaging in adult activities (for example: operating a motorcycle, car, or boat) are required to conform to an adult standard of care."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "How are minors generally judged in negligence actions?", "answer": "In negligence actions, minors are generally judged by what would be expected of a child of similar age, experience, and intelligence (subjective test)."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A 12-year-old is driving a motor boat. What standard of care is the child held to?", "answer": "A 12-year-old driving a motor boat will be held to the same standard of care as an adult."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In negligence actions, are minors held to the standard of a reasonable child of similar age, intelligence, and experience?", "answer": "Yes. In negligence actions, minors are held to the standard of a reasonable child (not that of an adult) of similar age, intelligence, and experience (capacity)."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff establish to prove a prima facie case of professional negligence?", "answer": "To prove a prima facie case of professional negligence, the plaintiff must establish the appropriate standard of care and show the defendant failed to adhere to that standard of care. The plaintiff must generally use expert testimony to establish what a reasonable professional would have done in the situation."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are parents liable for a child's torts/negligence merely on the basis of the parental relationship alone?", "answer": "No. Parents are not liable for a child's torts/negligence merely on the basis of the parental relationship alone, although a parent can be guilty of negligent supervision, failure to warn, or failure to exercise reasonable care to protect against the child's dangerous propensities."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a parent's duty to an invitee extend to warning of hazards the invitee may face on the property or upon leaving the property?", "answer": "Yes. A parent's duty to an invitee extends to warning of hazards the invitee may face on the property or upon leaving the property."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a negligence claim based on the parent's failure to warn hold up if the injured party was aware of the hazard through general knowledge, observation, or common sense?", "answer": "No. A negligence claim based on the parent's failure to warn will not hold up if the injured party was aware of the hazard through general knowledge, observation, or common sense, because the failure to warn cannot be the proximate cause of the invitee's injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the evidence of industry custom conclusive on the issue of a plaintiff's negligence?", "answer": "No. Evidence of industry custom is relevant and admissible, but not conclusive, on the issue of the plaintiff's negligence to the same extent it would be in a suit by the defendant against the plaintiff for damage to the defendant's truck."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the existence of an ordinary custom in an industry relevant and admissible in evidence on the issue of negligence?", "answer": "Yes. The existence of an ordinary custom in an industry is relevant and admissible in evidence on the issue of negligence, but it is not conclusive because the negligence standard of an ordinarily prudent person may be a higher standard than the standard of care followed by a particular community or industry."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A 13-year-old boy with an IQ of 60 drives a car without parental supervision and accidentally hits a pedestrian. Will he be liable in negligence?", "answer": "Yes. He will be liable in negligence because he was engaging in an adult activity, and a minor who engages in a dangerous activity is held to the adult standard of care without considering the minor's mental disability or lack of experience."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "How is a child held in terms of the standard of care?", "answer": "A child is held to the level of conduct of a reasonable person of that age and experience, not that of an adult."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is the standard of conduct for a child?", "answer": "A child is held to the level of conduct of a reasonable person of that age and experience. However, where a child engages in a potentially dangerous activity normally pursued only by adults, the child will be held to the standard of care that a reasonable adult doing that activity would exercise. For example, a 13-year-old boy with an IQ of 60 drives a car without parental supervision and accidentally hits a pedestrian. Will he be liable in negligence? Yes. He will be liable in negligence because he was engaging in an adult activity, and a minor who engages in a dangerous activity is held to the adult standard of care without considering the minor's mental disability or lack of experience."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A mother gives birth to a blind baby after a doctor negligently fails to diagnose a common genetic defect responsible for the blindness. What is the best action against the doctor?", "answer": "The best action against the doctor is a wrongful birth action by the mother for expenses she has incurred due to the baby's blindness. The mother can argue that but for the doctor's negligence, she would not have proceeded with the pregnancy."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is a wrongful birth action?", "answer": "A wrongful birth action is a claim by parents of a deformed or defective child who allege that negligent advice as to the risk of genetic or birth defects, or negligent treatment, or failure to abort a fetus, by the defendant deprived them of the choice of avoiding the child's conception or of terminating the pregnancy. The parents are entitled to compensation for the financial loss they will suffer for raising a physically or mentally challenged child. For example, a mother gives birth to a blind baby after a doctor negligently fails to diagnose a common genetic defect responsible for the blindness. What is the best action against the doctor? The best action against the doctor is a wrongful birth action by the mother for expenses she has incurred due to the baby's blindness. The mother can argue that but for the doctor's negligence, she would not have proceeded with the pregnancy."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a criminal statute be used to set the standard of care in a negligence action?", "answer": "Yes. A criminal statute can be used to set the standard of care in a negligence action if: (1) the statute in question was designed to protect the class of persons that includes the plaintiff; and (2) the statute was designed to protect against the kind of harm the plaintiff actually suffered. For example, a criminal statute requires fire sprinklers in warehouses. The plaintiff is injured due to a fire in the defendant's unsprinklered warehouse. Can the plaintiff recover from the defendant? Yes. The plaintiff can recover from the defendant because the plaintiff was harmed by the defendant's violation of a statute enacted to protect against this type of harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A man sues a car rental agency for his injuries caused by an exploding bomb hidden in his rented car. Is the rental agency liable?", "answer": "No. The rental agency is not liable since the danger is not reasonably foreseeable due to the extreme rarity of such an event. The rental company had no specific reasons to suspect such a danger."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is the standard of conduct to avoid being negligent?", "answer": "The standard of conduct to which one must conform to avoid being negligent is that of a reasonable person under like circumstances."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A hiker enters the owner's land without the owner's knowledge or permission and is injured by a falling tree limb infested by termites. Is the owner liable for the hiker's injury?", "answer": "No. The owner is not liable for the hiker's injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A person is hiking on private property without the owner's knowledge or permission and is injured. Is the owner liable?", "answer": "No. If a person is hiking on private property without the owner's knowledge or permission and is injured, the owner is generally not liable. A possessor of land is not required to exercise reasonable care to make his land safe for trespassers except for artificial conditions highly dangerous to trespassers and only when he knows about the trespasser or has some reason to anticipate the trespasser's presence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a police officer injured in a non-emergency situation sue the tortfeasor for negligence?", "answer": "Yes. A police officer injured in a non-emergency situation can sue the tortfeasor for negligence if the injury was not based on the risks inherent with dangerous police work."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A bright nine-year-old fails to appreciate an obvious risk where a sign also warns of the danger. Will a claim of negligence succeed in a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction?", "answer": "No. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, if a bright nine-year-old fails to appreciate an obvious risk where a sign also warns of the danger, a claim of negligence will fail."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, will a claim of negligence by a bright nine-year-old fail if the child fails to appreciate an obvious risk?", "answer": "Yes. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, if a bright nine-year-old fails to appreciate an obvious risk where a sign also warns of the danger, a claim of negligence will fail. A danger encountered by a child trespasser is not an attractive nuisance unless there is evidence that the possessor has reason to know that children are likely to trespass and evidence that the plaintiff did not appreciate the risk involved."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, is a day care center negligent if a child escapes and is injured despite the center exercising reasonable care?", "answer": "No. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, if a child in a day care center somehow escapes and is injured, the day care center will not be held negligent if the center exercised reasonable care to ensure that the children in their charge did not leave the premises."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant is sued for negligence based on a violation of a statute. When should the action be dismissed?", "answer": "The action should be dismissed if it can be shown that the statute was not intended to protect the plaintiff from the type of harm that occurred."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When should an action for negligence be dismissed if it is based on a violation of a statute?", "answer": "An action for negligence should be dismissed if the only evidence supporting the claim is that the defendant violated a statute and it can be shown that the statute was not intended to protect the plaintiff from the type of harm that occurred."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can the seller of a house be held liable for negligence if he was aware of a defective condition and a person is subsequently injured by it?", "answer": "Yes. The seller of a house can be held liable for negligence if he was aware of a defective condition, sells the home, and a person is subsequently injured by the defective condition."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a defendant be found negligent for failure to warn if a reasonably prudent person would warn of the danger?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can be found negligent for failure to warn if a reasonably prudent person would warn of the danger."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a common carrier liable if conditions made it impossible to render assistance to an injured passenger?", "answer": "No. Although a common carrier has a duty to aid an injured passenger, the carrier is not liable if conditions made it impossible for the carrier to render assistance."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If an injured party violated a safety statute, but the injury was not the result of a risk the statute was designed to protect against, should the violation be considered by the jury?", "answer": "No. If an injured party violated a safety statute, but the injury to the injured party was not the result of a risk the statute was designed to protect against, the violation of the statute should not be considered by the jury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the Attractive Nuisance doctrine, what duty does an owner owe to a trespassing child?", "answer": "Under the Attractive Nuisance doctrine, an owner owes a duty of reasonable care to a trespassing child if: (1) the owner knows that the area is one where children are likely to trespass; (2) the owner has reason to know that the condition poses an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death to trespassing children; (3) the injured child either does not discover the condition or does not realize the danger, due to his youth; (4) the benefit to the owner of maintaining the condition in its dangerous form is slight weighed against the risk to the children; and (5) the owner fails to use reasonable care to eliminate the danger."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the Attractive Nuisance doctrine, what duty does an owner owe to a trespassing child when the benefit of maintaining a dangerous condition is slight?", "answer": "Under the Attractive Nuisance doctrine, an owner owes a duty of reasonable care to a trespassing child if the benefit to the owner of maintaining the condition in its dangerous form is slight weighed against the risk to children, and the owner fails to use reasonable care to eliminate the danger."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When does an unexcused violation of a safety statute by a defendant constitute negligence per se?", "answer": "When a safety statute has a sufficiently close application to the facts of the case at hand, an unexcused violation of that statute by a defendant is 'negligence per se,' and thus conclusively establishes that the defendant was negligent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are undiscovered trespassers owed a duty of care?", "answer": "No. Undiscovered trespassers (i.e. people on land without the occupier's knowledge) are never owed a duty of care, no matter how they were injured."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a rescuer assert a claim against a property owner for the rescuer's injuries if the property owner was not at fault?", "answer": "No. A rescuer cannot assert a claim against a property owner for the rescuer's injuries if the property owner was not at fault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant's negligence creates a danger which causes a third person to attempt a rescue. Is the defendant liable to the rescuer?", "answer": "Yes. If a defendant's negligence creates a danger which causes some third person to attempt a rescue, the defendant may be liable to the rescuer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A driver injures someone because his brakes failed. Can the driver defend himself by showing he used reasonable care in maintaining his brakes?", "answer": "Yes. If a driver injures someone because his brakes failed, a defense is that the driver used reasonable care in the maintenance of his brakes."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a plaintiff rely on the jurors' common knowledge to establish a breach of standard of care in negligence?", "answer": "Yes. For negligence, in order to establish a breach of standard of care owed to a plaintiff, the plaintiff can rely on the application of the jurors' common knowledge as to whether there was a breach."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When does a defendant fail to exercise reasonable care?", "answer": "A defendant fails to exercise reasonable care when the probability and probable gravity of harm the defendant's conduct is likely to cause outweighs the burden on the defendant to avoid risk and the utility of his conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A mechanic negligently inspects a driver's brakes. Can the mechanic be held liable for a car accident caused by the faulty brakes?", "answer": "Yes. A mechanic can be held liable for a car accident if the mechanic was negligent in inspecting the driver's brakes."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a claim for negligence succeed if the tortfeasor could have taken reasonable steps to prevent the injury but didn't?", "answer": "Yes. A claim for negligence will succeed if the tortfeasor could have taken reasonable steps to prevent the injury but didn't."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a violation of a statute constitute negligence per se if the violator's conduct does not constitute the type of risk that the statute was designed to protect against?", "answer": "No. A violation of a statute will not constitute negligence per se if the violator's conduct does not constitute the type of risk that the statute was designed to protect against."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a negligence cause of action fail if a reasonably prudent person could not foresee injury to the plaintiff as a result of the defendant's action?", "answer": "Yes. A negligence cause of action will fail if a reasonably prudent person could not foresee injury to the plaintiff as a result of the defendant's action."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a person a negligent tortfeasor regardless of his mental state if his conduct imposes an unreasonable risk upon another that results in injury to that other person?", "answer": "Yes. If a person's conduct imposes an unreasonable risk upon another that results in injury to that other person, he is a negligent tortfeasor, regardless of his mental state."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A person violates a statute, but the violation is not the proximate cause of the injury to another person. Is there a cause of action for negligence?", "answer": "No. If a person violates a statute, but the violation of the statute is not the proximate cause of the injury to the other person, there is no cause of action for negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The trier of fact takes into account the injured party's violation of a safety statute in determining the tortfeasor's liability. Will the tortfeasor remain liable if the violation of the statute is not the proximate cause of the injury to the plaintiff?", "answer": "Yes. If the violation of the statute is not the proximate cause of the injury to the plaintiff, the tortfeasor will remain liable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a passenger in a car injured in an accident recover from the driver under a negligence theory if the driver did not act unreasonably?", "answer": "No. Negligence requires that the driver breached a duty of care by acting unreasonably. If the driver acted within the reasonable standards of care, they cannot be found negligent and therefore the passenger cannot recover under a negligence theory."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a person be found negligent if they exercised the due care a reasonable person in the same circumstances would have exercised and the risk of danger was not foreseeable?", "answer": "No. A person cannot be found negligent if they exercised the due care a reasonable person in the same circumstances would have exercised and the risk of danger was not foreseeable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a contractor liable under a negligence theory if the contractor has reason to know that a condition at his work site poses an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death to trespassers and the contractor fails to use reasonable care to eliminate the danger?", "answer": "Yes. A contractor is liable under a negligence theory if the contractor has reason to know that a condition at his work site poses an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death to trespassers and the contractor fails to use reasonable care to eliminate the danger."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A driver drives off the road and hits someone. Is the driver guilty of negligence?", "answer": "Yes. A driver is guilty of negligence if he drives off the road and hits someone because his conduct imposed an unreasonable risk upon another that resulted in injury to that other person."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a babysitting service be liable for injuries to a child being watched if the company or its employees failed to exercise reasonable care to assure the child's safety?", "answer": "Yes. A babysitting service can be liable for injuries to a child being watched if the company or its employees failed to exercise reasonable care to assure the child's safety."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A doctor fails to inform a patient that an operation has a 2% risk of death and the operation is a success. Is there negligence?", "answer": "No. If a doctor fails to inform you that the operation has a 2% risk of death and the operation is a success, there is no negligence because you were not harmed."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a medical malpractice case, can an expert witness read passages from a reliable authority during direct examination?", "answer": "Yes. In a medical malpractice case, during direct, you can have an expert witness read passages from a reliable authority as both a basis of opinion and as substantive evidence of the proper standard of care."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are common carriers under a duty to their passengers to take reasonable action to protect them against unreasonable risk of physical harm?", "answer": "Yes. Common carriers are under a duty to their passengers to take reasonable action to protect them against unreasonable risk of physical harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a rescuer undertakes a rescue, must he be reasonably prudent?", "answer": "Yes. If a rescuer undertakes a rescue, he must be reasonably prudent. If he is negligent, he is liable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A car rolls down a hill and injures a plaintiff who was not paying attention. Does res ipsa loquitur apply despite the plaintiff's contribution?", "answer": "Yes. Res ipsa loquitur applies despite the plaintiff's contribution if the defendant's negligence in parking the car on the hill caused it to roll down and injure the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff is scalded by extremely hot water while taking a shower in a hotel. What must the plaintiff prove to establish that the scalding probably happened because of the negligence of the hotel?", "answer": "The plaintiff needs to prove that nothing in the plaintiff's own conduct explains how the incident occurred."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In res ipsa loquitur cases, do plaintiffs need to exclude the possibility of their own contribution to the accident?", "answer": "Yes. Generally, in res ipsa loquitur cases, the plaintiff needs to exclude the possibility of the plaintiff's own contribution to the accident."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is contributory negligence often a full defense in res ipsa loquitur cases?", "answer": "No. Courts today no longer view contributory negligence as a full defense. Victim fault does not often apply in cases of res ipsa loquitur because these are cases where the defendant has exclusive control over the instrumentality."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Cattle escape from a well-constructed fence enclosure and cause a car accident. The plaintiff did not contribute to the accident. Is a res ipsa loquitur instruction permissible?", "answer": "Yes. A res ipsa loquitur instruction is permissible because the jury could conclude that cattle would not ordinarily escape a strong, secure fence in the absence of negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "To show that res ipsa loquitur applies when a farm animal escapes confinement and causes injury to a person on a public road, what must the plaintiff establish?", "answer": "The plaintiff must establish that: (1) the animal which caused the accident would not have been running-at-large on a public road in the absence of someone's negligence; (2) the animal was in the defendant's control; and (3) the accident was not due to the plaintiff's conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A store employee tells a plaintiff to pick up a box of clothes from a back storeroom marked with an 'employees only' sign. If the plaintiff is injured in the storeroom due to an exposed electric outlet, is the store liable?", "answer": "Yes. The store will be liable because the plaintiff was an invitee in the storeroom."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is an invitee?", "answer": "An invitee is a person who has an express or implied invitation to enter or use another's premises, such as a business visitor or a member of the public to whom the premises are held open."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A chair falls out of a hotel window and injures a passerby. Are the occupants of the rooms from which the chair might have been thrown liable under res ipsa loquitur?", "answer": "No. The occupants of all the rooms from which the chair might have been thrown are not liable under res ipsa since the guests only have partial control of the furniture."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A chair falls out of a hotel window and injures a passerby. Is the hotel liable under res ipsa loquitur?", "answer": "No. A hotel is not liable under res ipsa loquitur if a chair falls out of a window and injures a passerby because the chair was not under the hotel's exclusive control."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff is injured when a hospital wheelchair collapses. Can the plaintiff claim res ipsa loquitur negligence?", "answer": "Yes. If a plaintiff is injured when a hospital wheelchair collapses, the plaintiff may be permitted to claim res ipsa loquitur negligence, so long as the plaintiff can exclude himself as the probable cause of the injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff establish to succeed under res ipsa loquitur?", "answer": "To succeed under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the instrumentality which caused the harm was at all times within the exclusive control of the defendant."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "To succeed under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, must there be no direct evidence of the defendant's conduct?", "answer": "Yes. To succeed under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, there must be no direct evidence of the defendant's conduct; the event must be of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence of someone's negligence; it must be caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant; and it must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a res ipsa loquitur claim fail if the trier of fact determines that the person in control of the instrumentality took reasonable precautions to prevent the injury?", "answer": "Yes. A claim based on res ipsa loquitur will fail if the trier of fact determines that the person in control of the instrumentality had taken reasonable precautions to prevent such an injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can punitive damages be awarded if the plaintiff has pled and proved that the defendant's misconduct was aggravated by a culpable state of mind such as malice, willful and wanton misconduct, intentional misconduct, or a reckless disregard for the rights of others?", "answer": "Yes. In tort cases, where the plaintiff has already established a cognizable legal injury (even if the damages are nominal), punitive damages may be awarded where the plaintiff has pled and proved that the defendant's misconduct was aggravated by a culpable state of mind such as malice, willful and wanton misconduct, intentional misconduct, or a reckless disregard for the rights of others when such conduct is tantamount to evil intent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A negligent driver injures a plaintiff who then goes to a doctor who negligently makes the plaintiff's injury worse. If the doctor is sued by the plaintiff for malpractice, can the doctor implead the driver?", "answer": "Yes. The doctor can implead the driver because a fact-finder could assign some of the responsibility for the plaintiff's injuries to the defendant."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does an intervening act by a third party or force break the chain of causation leading from the defendant's act to the plaintiff's injury if the intervention is foreseeable?", "answer": "No. An intervening act by a third party or force does not break the chain of causation leading from the defendant's act to the plaintiff's injury if the intervention is foreseeable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a defendant liable for injuries resulting from medical malpractice if the plaintiff seeks medical care due to the defendant's negligence?", "answer": "Yes. Courts generally hold that when the intervening negligence is medical malpractice, this does not break the causal chain because medical malpractice is a foreseeable result when the plaintiff has to seek medical care."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant drives an automobile at an excessive speed while another defendant negligently pushes the plaintiff into the path of the car, causing an indivisible injury. Is each defendant jointly and severally liable?", "answer": "Yes. Each defendant is jointly and severally liable if his conduct is a substantial factor in bringing about the harm, even if they did not act in concert."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Two defendants independently but concurrently act negligently, causing an indivisible injury. Are they jointly and severally liable?", "answer": "Yes. If two or more defendants are liable for a plaintiff's injury, the plaintiff can pursue the entire amount of damages from any one defendant, although this defendant can seek contribution from the other defendants if he pays more than his share of fault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is joint and several liability?", "answer": "Joint and several liability exists when the tortious conduct of each of two or more persons acting independently but concurrently combine as substantial factors in causing an indivisible injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A man has a reasonable chance (less than 50%) of surviving a heart failure if his heart disease is correctly diagnosed but a hospital fails to diagnose and he dies. Can his wife recover against the hospital?", "answer": "Yes. His wife will likely recover against the hospital in a jurisdiction that allows recovery for the loss of the chance for survival."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under a Loss of Chance of Survival claim, can a plaintiff recover for loss of chance or reduced chance of survival even if the plaintiff can't prove that it is more likely than not that defendant's negligent conduct caused the injury?", "answer": "Yes. Under a Loss of Chance of Survival claim, some jurisdictions allow for recovery for loss of chance or reduced chance of survival even though the plaintiff can't prove that it is more likely than not that defendant's negligent conduct caused the injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A pedestrian is hit by a car, resulting in an injury to his legs that makes them unsteady. The pedestrian later injures his shoulder when he falls down a stairway due to his unsteady legs. Is the driver liable for injuries both to his legs and shoulder?", "answer": "Yes. The driver is liable for injuries both to his legs and shoulder because the pedestrian's injuries are a foreseeable consequence of the original action and will not break the chain of causation."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a driver remain liable for subsequent injuries that result from a weakened condition of the plaintiff caused by the driver's negligence?", "answer": "Yes. Under the subsequent injuries exception, a defendant can be deemed to proximately cause injuries resulting from a weakened condition of the plaintiff when: (1) the original injury was the result of either a disease or broken/injured limbs and (2) the defendant's first injury made the plaintiff more susceptible."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a jurisdiction with a system of pure comparative negligence with joint and several liability, can a plaintiff pursue the entire amount of damages from any one defendant?", "answer": "Yes. In a jurisdiction with a system of pure comparative negligence with joint and several liability, the plaintiff can pursue the entire amount of damages from any one defendant, although this defendant can seek contribution from the other defendants if he pays more than his share of fault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under joint and several liability, can the entire judgment amount be collected from any of the guilty defendants, even a defendant that is just 1% at fault?", "answer": "Yes. Under joint and several liability, the entire judgment amount can be collected from any of the guilty defendants, even a defendant that is just 1% at fault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff became sick after eating food at a catered event. What must the plaintiff establish to succeed in a negligence claim against the caterer?", "answer": "The plaintiff must establish that the caterer was the actual and proximate cause of the illness in order to succeed in a negligence claim."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff establish to succeed in a negligence action against an attorney?", "answer": "To succeed in a negligence action against an attorney, a plaintiff must establish that the plaintiff would have recovered in the lawsuit the attorney negligently handled, but for the attorney's negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff show to succeed in a negligence cause of action?", "answer": "To succeed in a negligence cause of action, a plaintiff must show that the defendant's conduct was the cause in fact of the plaintiff's injury and had the defendant not acted negligently, the plaintiff's injuries would not have resulted."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If the combined negligent actions of two parties cause an injury and the damages are not divisible between the tortfeasors, are both tortfeasors liable for all the damages?", "answer": "Yes. If the combined negligent actions of two parties cause an injury and the damages are not divisible between the tortfeasors, both tortfeasors are liable for all the damages, jointly and severally."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If the negligence of two different parties contributed to the plaintiff's injury, are both negligent parties responsible for the full amount of the plaintiff's damages?", "answer": "Yes. If the negligence of two different parties contributed to the plaintiff's injury, both negligent parties are responsible for the full amount of the plaintiff's damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff show to prove a defendant's conduct was the 'cause in fact' of the plaintiff's injury?", "answer": "To prove a defendant's conduct was the 'cause in fact' of the plaintiff's injury, the plaintiff must show that had the defendant not acted negligently, the plaintiff's injuries would not have resulted. The plaintiff must also show that the defendant was the 'proximate cause' of those injuries a defendant will not be liable for the consequences that are very unforeseeable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff cannot prove which of three or more persons caused his injury, but can show that all produced a defective product. What will the court require from each defendant?", "answer": "The court will require each of the defendant's to pay that percentage of plaintiff's injuries which that defendant's sales bore to the total market sales of that type of product at the time of injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If more than one person is a proximate cause of a plaintiff's harm and the harm is indivisible, is each defendant liable for the entire harm?", "answer": "Yes. If more than one person is a proximate cause of a plaintiff's harm and the harm is indivisible, each defendant is liable for the entire harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the common law rules for indemnity, if one joint tortfeasor is found negligent in permitting the second joint tortfeasor to commit the tort, can the tortfeasor obtain indemnity for the full amount from the intentional tortfeasor?", "answer": "Yes. Under the common law rules for indemnity, if one joint tortfeasor is found negligent in permitting the second joint tortfeasor to commit the tort, the tortfeasor can obtain indemnity for the full amount from the intentional tortfeasor."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does joint and several liability exist under the common law?", "answer": "Yes. Under the common law, joint and several liability exists."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is the unit rule?", "answer": "Under the unit rule, the plaintiff's negligence is compared with the aggregate negligence of all the defendants, who may then through contribution adjust the loss among themselves."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the elements of a joint venture?", "answer": "A joint venture is defined as: (1) an agreement among members of a group; (2) a common purpose to be carried out by the group; (3) a community of pecuniary interest in that purpose; and (4) an equal right to a voice in the direction of the enterprise."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff show to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress in most jurisdictions?", "answer": "To recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress, most jurisdictions require that the plaintiff suffers some physical harm or the distress manifests itself through physical symptoms. Negligence causing 'pure' emotional distress is only actionable if the plaintiff was in the zone of danger of physical harm or the plaintiff and the defendant had a special relationship."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is negligence causing 'pure' emotional distress actionable?", "answer": "Negligence causing 'pure' emotional distress is actionable if the plaintiff was in the zone of danger of physical harm or the plaintiff and the defendant had a special relationship, such as therapist-patient, doctor-patient, or negligent handling of genetic material or a corpse."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A neighbor is aware of hunters on the land next door but chooses to trespass across the property as a shortcut and is injured by a gunshot. Is the landowner next door liable for the neighbor's injury?", "answer": "No. If a neighbor is aware of hunters on the land next door but chooses to trespass across the property as a shortcut and is injured by a gunshot, under common law, the landowner next door is not liable for the neighbor's injury on his land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under traditional rules of landowners' and occupiers' liability, what duty does a landowner owe to a trespasser?", "answer": "Under traditional rules of landowners' and occupiers' liability, a trespasser assumes all risks of the conditions which may be found. A landowner, landlord, or possessor only owes the trespasser a duty to avoid willful or wanton injury. Exceptions exist if the trespasser has been discovered or the trespass is frequent and reasonably anticipated."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff hires a funeral home to handle the burial of the plaintiff's late husband, but the funeral home negligently buries the husband in the wrong grave. Can the plaintiff recover for pure emotional distress?", "answer": "Yes. If a plaintiff hires a funeral home to handle the burial of the plaintiff's late husband, but due to negligence, the funeral home buries the husband in the wrong grave, the plaintiff may recover for pure emotional distress, even if the plaintiff has not suffered bodily harm from the distress."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the exceptions to the general rule for recovering damages for emotional distress caused by observing the negligently inflicted injury of a third person?", "answer": "There are two exceptions: (1) a plaintiff may recover damages for mental distress caused by the negligent handling of the corpse of a close relative despite not witnessing it; and (2) a plaintiff may recover damages when mistakenly informed of the death of a close relative."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When can a plaintiff recover damages for emotional distress caused by observing the negligently inflicted injury of a third person?", "answer": "A plaintiff may recover damages for emotional distress caused by observing the negligently inflicted injury of a third person only if the plaintiff: (1) was closely related to the victim; (2) was present at the scene of the injury-producing event and was aware the event was causing the injury; and (3) suffers serious emotional harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "An intoxicated person enters a bar and is refused service. Is there a further duty to monitor any subsequent activities of the person?", "answer": "No. If an intoxicated person enters a bar and is refused service, there is no further duty to monitor any subsequent activities of the person, absent some specific threat or some other basis from which danger may be reasonably anticipated."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a tavern or liquor vendor an insurer of his customers' safety?", "answer": "No. A tavern or liquor vendor is not an insurer of his customers' safety. They are generally only found liable if they sell alcohol to someone obviously intoxicated or to a minor."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff narrowly escapes getting hit by a car when the car runs over and kills a stranger. Can the plaintiff recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress under the 'zone of danger' rule?", "answer": "Yes. If a plaintiff narrowly escapes getting hit by a car when the car runs over and kills a stranger, the plaintiff can recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress under the 'zone of danger' rule if the plaintiff can prove severe emotional distress as a consequence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When can a bystander recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress under the 'zone of danger' rule?", "answer": "A bystander can recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress under the 'zone of danger' rule if the bystander can prove that he or she was placed in a zone of danger of imminent physical impact, reasonably feared for his or her safety, and as a consequence, suffered severe emotional distress."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a landlord be held liable for dog-bite injuries from a vicious dog belonging to a tenant?", "answer": "Yes. A landlord can be held liable for dog-bite injuries from a vicious dog belonging to a tenant if the landlord knew of the dog's vicious propensities when the premises were leased to the tenant. If the landlord does not have any notice of a tenant's dog's vicious propensities, the landlord will not be found liable if the tenant's dog injures a tenant's guest."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The owner of a store hires a construction company to design and build an entryway in a common area. Is the owner still liable if the entryway is defective?", "answer": "Yes. If the owner of a store hires a construction company to design and build an entryway in a common area, the owner is still liable if the entryway is defective because work in common areas accessible to the public generally places a non-delegable duty on the part of the owner."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A witness to an accident is not in the zone of danger. Can the bystander recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress?", "answer": "No. If a witness to an accident is not in the zone of danger, the bystander can never recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress unless the bystander suffers physical harm or the bystander is a close relative of the injured person."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a claim for emotional distress exist when a defendant negligently causes property loss to the plaintiff?", "answer": "No. No claim for emotional distress exists when a defendant negligently causes property loss to the plaintiff. The plaintiff can only sue for negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a landowner be held liable for a trespasser's injuries if the landowner was unaware of the trespasser's presence?", "answer": "No. A landowner will not be held liable for a trespasser's injuries if the landowner was unaware of the trespasser's presence or took reasonable steps to prevent the injury after becoming aware of the trespasser's presence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a landowner use excessive force to deter trespassers from entering onto the landowner's property?", "answer": "No. A landowner can never use excessive force to deter trespassers from entering onto the landowner's property."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a negligent person be found liable for an intervening act stemming from the negligence if the intervening act was not foreseeable?", "answer": "No. A person who is negligent will not be found liable for an intervening act stemming from the negligence if the intervening act was not foreseeable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will an injured party fully recover in tort if intervening causes contribute to produce the injury and the plaintiff is not at fault?", "answer": "Yes. An injured party will fully recover in tort if intervening causes contribute to produce the injury and the plaintiff is not at fault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a tortfeasor liable for any foreseeable damages that stem from his negligence?", "answer": "Yes. A tortfeasor is liable for any foreseeable damages that stem from his negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff show to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress if there is no physical impact?", "answer": "To recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress, a plaintiff must show physical manifestations of the distress in the absence of a physical impact on the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can you recover property damages for negligence and strict liability?", "answer": "Yes. For negligence and strict liability, you can recover property damages only."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can you recover pure economic damages for negligence and strict liability if you also have property damages or personal injuries?", "answer": "Yes. For negligence and strict liability, you can recover pure economic damages if you also have property damages or personal injuries."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does sovereign immunity attach to non-delegable duties that are 'proprietary' in nature?", "answer": "No. Sovereign immunity does not attach to non-delegable duties that are 'proprietary' in nature. For example, where a city supplies water, gas, electricity, or operates a ferry, dock, airport, or public market."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is a superseding cause?", "answer": "A superseding cause is an unforeseen intervening cause. This relieves the defendant from liability for his antecedent negligence because the superseding event becomes the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can recovery be allowed for mental disturbance alone unaccompanied by physical injury in negligence?", "answer": "No. In negligence, no recovery will be allowed for mental disturbance alone unaccompanied by physical injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a plaintiff recover for emotional distress if a hospital negligently sends the plaintiff the leg of a deceased relative?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff can recover for emotional distress if a hospital negligently sends the plaintiff the leg of a deceased relative."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is proximate cause?", "answer": "Proximate cause is a cause that is legally sufficient to result in liability. A defendant is liable for all harmful acts that are the normal incidents of and within the increased risk caused by his acts. Unforeseen conduct not within the increased risk created by the negligence is a superseding cause that breaks the causal connection."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What does negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) require?", "answer": "Negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) requires that the defendant's conduct create a foreseeable risk of physical injury to the plaintiff. The emotional distress caused by the conduct must also result in physical injury to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can strict liability be imposed in favor of undiscovered trespassers against landowners in the absence of negligence by the landowner?", "answer": "No. Strict liability will not be imposed in favor of undiscovered trespassers against landowners in the absence of negligence by the landowner."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an employer liable for the negligent acts of an independent contractor if the employer has not retained control of any part of the work or interfered with the job's performance?", "answer": "No. An employer is not liable for the negligent acts of an independent contractor if the employer has not retained control of any part of the work or interfered with the job's performance."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an employer of an independent contractor liable for injury caused by the contractor if the employer has retained control of some part of the work and failed to exercise that control with reasonable care?", "answer": "Yes. An employer of an independent contractor may be liable for injury caused by the contractor if the employer has retained control of some part of the work and failed to exercise that control with reasonable care."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a defendant researches and hires a reputable medical provider to treat contestants in a race sponsored by the defendant, is the defendant vicariously liable if the medical provider negligently aggravates a contestant's injury?", "answer": "No. The defendant is not vicariously liable because the employer of an independent contractor is generally not responsible for the negligence of the contractor."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an employer liable for the torts of an independent contractor if the employer exercised due care in selecting the contractor?", "answer": "No. Employers are not liable for the torts of independent contractors if they exercised due care in selecting the contractor, unless the duty in question is non-delegable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can an employer be liable for his own negligent hiring of an employee if the employer had reason to be on notice that the harmful action committed by the employee within the scope of employment was likely to occur?", "answer": "Yes. An employer may be liable for his own negligent hiring of an employee if the employer had reason to be on notice that the harmful action committed by the employee within the scope of employment was likely to occur."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, is an employer vicariously liable for the criminal or tortious conduct of an employee outside the scope of his employment?", "answer": "No. Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, an employer is generally not vicariously liable for the criminal or tortious conduct of an employee outside the scope of his employment."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is superior knowledge of a dangerous condition by itself sufficient to establish liability?", "answer": "No. Superior knowledge of a dangerous condition by itself, in absence of duty, is insufficient to establish liability, unless there is a special relationship."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When will courts consider a defendant owes a plaintiff a duty of care?", "answer": "In determining whether or not a defendant owes the plaintiff a duty of care, courts will consider: (1) whether the defendant has custody of the plaintiff; (2) whether the plaintiff is not able to determine his own actions; (3) whether there is a financial relationship between the parties; (4) whether the plaintiff expects protection from the defendant; and (5) actual knowledge of a dangerous condition may impose a duty."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a franchisor be liable for acts or defaults of the franchisee under agency theory if the third party had reason to believe the franchisor stood behind the franchisee because the franchisor's name and logo were on the franchisee's business and business literature?", "answer": "Yes. A franchisor may incur liability to third parties for acts or defaults of the franchisee under agency theory if the third party had reason to believe the franchisor stood behind the franchisee because the franchisor's name and logo were on the franchisee's business and business literature."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a principal be liable for acts or omissions of an apparent agent if the principal creates the appearance that an entity is an agent and an innocent third party justifiably relies on the care or skill of that apparent agent?", "answer": "Yes. If a principal creates the appearance that an entity is an agent, and an innocent third party justifiably relies on the care or skill of that apparent agent, the principal will be liable for acts or omissions of the apparent agent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A hotel hires an independent contractor to regularly maintain its elevators. A plaintiff is injured when an elevator door abruptly closes on his arm while visiting a guest at the hotel. Can the court deny the defendant's motion for a directed verdict based on Res Ipsa Loquitur?", "answer": "Yes. The court must deny the defendant's motion for a directed verdict because the finder of fact could infer that the elevator's malfunction was due to negligence under the theory of Res Ipsa Loquitur."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the nondelegable duty doctrine, can a party responsible for the safety of its facilities avoid liability by delegating that responsibility to a third party?", "answer": "No. Under the nondelegable duty doctrine, a party responsible for the safety of its facilities cannot avoid liability by delegating that responsibility to a third party."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When can negligence be inferred under the theory of Res Ipsa Loquitur?", "answer": "Negligence can be inferred under the theory of Res Ipsa Loquitur if: (1) the harm is of a kind that does not ordinarily occur in the absence of some negligence; (2) the alleged negligence is within the scope of the duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff; and (3) the evidence eliminates other responsible causes including the conduct of the plaintiff and third parties."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A business invitee injures himself due to a repair negligently performed by a contractor. Is the business owner personally liable despite his reasonable care in selecting and supervising the contractor?", "answer": "Yes. The business owner is personally liable despite his reasonable care in selecting and supervising the contractor because those who keep land open to the public have a nondelegable duty to maintain the land safe for business invitees."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a possessor's duty to invitees nondelegable, and is he liable if his employee or an independent contractor whom he has hired to perform for him fails to perform properly?", "answer": "Yes. A possessor's duty to invitees is nondelegable, and he will be liable if his employee or an independent contractor whom he has hired to perform for him fails to perform properly."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can an employer be held liable for negligence or negligent hiring if the employer failed to use reasonable care to protect a customer harmed by an employee?", "answer": "Yes. If an employee harms a customer, the employer can be held liable for negligence or negligent hiring if the employer failed to use reasonable care to protect the customer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a person who hires an independent contractor have recourse against the contractor for indemnification if there is a judgment against the person for the contractor's negligence?", "answer": "Yes. If a person is liable for an independent contractor's negligence because of vicarious liability, the person has recourse against the contractor for indemnification if there is a judgment against the person."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can an employer escape liability for damages caused by an independent contractor performing an inherently dangerous activity?", "answer": "No. An employer cannot escape liability for damages caused by an independent contractor performing an inherently dangerous activity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are parents generally liable for the intentional torts of their children?", "answer": "No. Parents are not generally liable for the intentional torts of their children except when the parents are on notice or encouraged the behavior."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a car owner be liable for negligent entrustment in lending a car to someone he knows is a bad driver?", "answer": "Yes. A car owner can be liable for negligent entrustment in lending a car to someone he knows is a bad driver."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under respondeat superior, can an employer be held liable for slight departures made by his employee that result in negligence if the slight departures were foreseeable?", "answer": "Yes. Under respondeat superior, an employer can be held liable for slight departures made by his employee that result in negligence if the slight departures were foreseeable, making the departure within the scope of employment."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the person who hires an independent contractor responsible for the negligence of the independent contractor if the activity is not inherently dangerous?", "answer": "No. The person who hires an independent contractor is generally not responsible for the negligence of the independent contractor if the activity is not inherently dangerous."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a master liable if he retains a servant who he knows has a habit of misconducting himself?", "answer": "Yes. A master is liable if he retains a servant who he knows has a habit of misconducting himself."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A landlord fails to provide reasonably safe premises by having stairs that were missing steps. The plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily chooses to go down the stairs even though there was a different route. Can the plaintiff recover for his injuries under the traditional common law defense of assumption of risk?", "answer": "No. The plaintiff cannot recover for his injuries under the traditional common law defense of assumption of risk because he knowingly and voluntarily confronted the risk."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the traditional common law defense of assumption of risk, can a plaintiff who voluntarily assumes the risk of injury arising from the negligent conduct of the defendant recover for his injuries?", "answer": "No. Under the traditional common law defense of assumption of risk, a plaintiff who voluntarily assumes the risk of injury arising from the negligent conduct of the defendant cannot recover for his injuries."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If Peter is injured by Dave, Doug, and Diana, and the jury determines that Peter is 25% responsible and each defendant was also 25% responsible, can Peter recover from any defendant in a modified comparative fault jurisdiction?", "answer": "No. Peter cannot recover from any defendant in a modified comparative fault jurisdiction because each defendant's responsibility was equal to Peter's."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a jurisdiction with a modified comparative fault regime, will Peter's action fail completely if his fault is equal to or greater than the defendant's?", "answer": "Yes. In a jurisdiction with a modified comparative fault regime, Peter's action will fail completely if his fault is equal to or greater than the defendant's."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a jurisdiction with a pure comparative fault system, how will Peter's recovery be affected if Peter's injury is partly his own fault?", "answer": "In a jurisdiction with a pure comparative fault system, Peter's recovery will be reduced in proportion to Peter's degree of responsibility."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant illegally carries on blasting operations next to the public highway. The plaintiff approaches in a car, ignores a conspicuous warning sign and a flagman who tries to stop him, insists upon proceeding along the highway, and the plaintiff's car is damaged by the blasting. Can the defendant be found liable?", "answer": "No. The defendant will not be found liable because the plaintiff assumed the risk."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a plaintiff who voluntarily assumes the risk of injury arising from the negligent conduct of the defendant recover for her injuries?", "answer": "No. A plaintiff who voluntarily assumes the risk of injury arising from the negligent conduct of the defendant cannot recover for her injuries."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can summary judgment be granted in a negligence action if it can be concluded as a matter of law that the defendant was negligent?", "answer": "Yes. Summary judgment may be granted in a negligence action only if it can be concluded as a matter of law that the defendant was negligent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In negligence cases, is summary judgment usually appropriate even if all the parties are in agreement as to the underlying facts?", "answer": "No. Negligence cases usually do not lend themselves to summary judgment because the very question of negligence is itself a question for jury determination."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is whether the plaintiff assumed the risk a jury question if there is a scintilla of evidence to the contrary?", "answer": "Yes. Whether the plaintiff assumed the risk is a jury question if there is a scintilla of evidence to the contrary because issues of negligence and assumption of the risk are questions of fact for the jury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant shoots and injures a plaintiff during a game of Russian Roulette in a jurisdiction where the traditional defense of contributory negligence is available. What is the most important issue?", "answer": "The most important issue is whether the plaintiff was also negligent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a jurisdiction applies the traditional defenses based on a plaintiff's conduct, are the common law defenses of contributory negligence and implied assumption of the risk applicable in a cause of action for negligence?", "answer": "Yes. If a jurisdiction applies the traditional defenses based on a plaintiff's conduct, the common law defenses of contributory negligence and implied assumption of the risk are applicable in a cause of action for negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A man joins a tennis class after signing a waiver that reads, \u201cI assume all risk of injuries in this class whether due to negligence or any other fault.\u201d The instructor subsequently hits the man's face with a tennis racket while serving. What is the man's best argument against the validity of the waiver in his personal injury claim?", "answer": "The man's best argument against the validity of the waiver in his personal injury claim is that public policy disfavors enforcing waivers that insulate people from the consequences of their own negligence, especially when the actual risk that materialized is not inherent to a tennis lesson but is a common risk of being careless."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are waivers of liability for negligence favored by the law?", "answer": "No. Waivers of liability for negligence are not favored by the law, and courts generally construe them strictly against the releasee."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In negligence actions, is the fact that the tortfeasor is indigent and his care is paid for by the state relevant to the defendant's tort liability?", "answer": "No. The fact that the tortfeasor is indigent and his care is paid for by the state is irrelevant to the defendant's tort liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In negligence actions, can the plaintiff recover punitive damages for intentional torts or reckless conduct?", "answer": "Yes. In negligence actions, the plaintiff can recover punitive damages for intentional torts or reckless conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In negligence actions, can the plaintiff recover punitive damages for ordinary negligence?", "answer": "No. In negligence actions, a plaintiff cannot recover punitive damages for ordinary negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the last clear chance doctrine, can a plaintiff who was contributorily negligent recover if the defendant had the last clear chance to avoid harm to the plaintiff?", "answer": "Yes. Under the last clear chance doctrine, a plaintiff who was contributorily negligent can recover if the defendant had the last clear chance to avoid harm to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a \u201cpure\u201d comparative negligence jurisdiction, will an injured party recover the full amount of his damages?", "answer": "No. In a \u201cpure\u201d comparative negligence jurisdiction, an injured party will only recover a proportion of his damages based on the respective degrees of his negligence and that of the tortfeasor."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does the defense of assumption of risk apply if the defendant's conduct left the plaintiff with no reasonable choice but to encounter a known danger?", "answer": "No. The defense of assumption of risk does not apply if the defendant's conduct left the plaintiff with no reasonable choice but to encounter a known danger."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a defendant raise the defense that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent per se if the plaintiff violates a statute and the injury was the type of injury the statute was designed to protect against?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can raise the defense that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent per se if the plaintiff violates a statute and the injury was the type of injury the statute was designed to protect against."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the Last Clear Chance Doctrine, who is viewed as the worst wrongdoer?", "answer": "The last wrongdoer is worst wrongdoer and should pay."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under traditional contributory negligence, can a plaintiff's contributory negligence bar recovery unless the defendant's conduct was wanton and willful?", "answer": "Yes. Under traditional contributory negligence, a plaintiff's contributory negligence bars recovery unless the defendant's conduct was wanton and willful, even if the defendant is liable because of strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a partial comparative negligence jurisdiction, can a plaintiff recover if the plaintiff's negligence was less than the defendant's negligence?", "answer": "Yes. In a partial comparative negligence jurisdiction, a plaintiff can recover so long as the plaintiff's negligence was less than the defendant's negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does assumption of risk apply when the person is subjectively aware of the risk and consciously disregards it?", "answer": "Yes. Assumption of risk applies when the person is subjectively aware of the risk and consciously disregards it."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "D, who weighs 300 pounds and is drunk, tells his 100-pound bartender, \u201cI'm going to rip your arm off and beat you over your head until you're dead.\u201d D pounds his fist into his own hand. Does this action constitute assault?", "answer": "Yes. This action constitutes assault because the words plus an overt act create the reasonable expectation of harmful contact."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does the tort of assault require actual physical contact to the plaintiff?", "answer": "No. The tort of assault does not require actual physical contact to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "For the tort of assault, must the defendant intend at the time of the act either to commit a harmful or offensive bodily contact, or to instill apprehension of such contact?", "answer": "Yes. For the tort of assault, the defendant must intend at the time of the act either to commit a harmful or offensive bodily contact, or to instill apprehension of such contact."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "For the tort of assault, must the plaintiff be placed in apprehension of such imminent or immediate bodily harm?", "answer": "Yes. For the tort of assault, the plaintiff must be placed in apprehension of such imminent or immediate bodily harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The defendant hires A to cut down trees he thinks are on his property, but later discovers the trees are on the plaintiff's property. Can the plaintiff recover from either A or D?", "answer": "Yes. The plaintiff may recover from either A for cutting the trees or from D because a person who hires another to perform an act undertakes to indemnify him for those acts."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is conversion?", "answer": "Conversion is the intentional interference with the property of another that is serious enough in nature or consequence that the defendant should be required to pay the full value of the property, regardless of whether the defendant knows that the property is in another's possession."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a company that sells 10,000,000 tires per year determines that an undetectable defect occurs in 1 out of every 10,000 tires, will a person injured by the defect succeed in a claim of battery?", "answer": "No. The person injured by the defect will fail in a claim of battery because the driver cannot establish that the company intended or knew to a substantial certainty that its placement of the tire into the stream of commerce would cause the plaintiff to suffer a harmful or offensive contact."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is statistical knowledge that one's multiple acts over time have a high statistical likelihood of harming someone from a large class of potential victims sufficient to establish intent through the substantial certainty test?", "answer": "No. Statistical knowledge that one's multiple acts over time have a high statistical likelihood of harming someone from a large class of potential victims is not sufficient to establish intent through the substantial certainty test."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is conduct considered extreme and outrageous if it transcends all bounds of decency?", "answer": "Yes. Conduct is considered extreme and outrageous if it transcends all bounds of decency."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the elements required for intentional infliction of emotional distress?", "answer": "The elements required for intentional infliction of emotional distress are: (1) conduct by the defendant amounting to extreme and outrageous conduct; (2) intent on the part of the defendant to cause the plaintiff to suffer severe emotional distress or recklessness as to the effect of the defendant's conduct; (3) causation; and (4) damages, i.e., severe emotional distress."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does the doctrine of transferred intent apply if the actor is doing a lawful act?", "answer": "No. The doctrine of transferred intent does not apply if the actor is doing a lawful act."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a hunter shooting a deer, but the bullet misses the deer and strikes a person, a transferred battery?", "answer": "No. This would not be a transferred battery because it was a lawful act to shoot the deer, meaning the hunter was not committing a battery by shooting the deer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A doctor molests a child in his examination room. The mother was in the waiting room. Can the mother recover for IIED?", "answer": "No. The mother cannot recover for IIED because she was neither the direct victim of the doctor's conduct nor a contemporaneous witness."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a close family member recover for intentional infliction of mental distress if he or she was not in the zone of danger but simply near the scene when witnessing the event?", "answer": "Yes. A close family member can recover for intentional infliction of mental distress if he or she was not in the zone of danger but simply near the scene when witnessing the event, provided: (1) the plaintiff was located near the scene of the accident; (2) the plaintiff witnessed the accident or incident firsthand and the shock that resulted from this direct emotional impact was contemporaneous; (3) the plaintiff and the victim were closely related; and (4) the injury to the victim was severe or even death."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a trespass occur above or below the surface?", "answer": "Yes. A trespass may occur above or below the surface since the possessory right is deemed to extend vertically in those directions from the boundary line on the surface."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an underground intrusion from a well dug at an angle on neighboring land that intrudes onto the plaintiff's land a trespass?", "answer": "Yes. An underground intrusion from a well dug at an angle on neighboring land that intrudes onto the plaintiff's land is a trespass."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the depletion of water, oil, or gas from a common basin by a perpendicular well dug on neighboring land a trespass?", "answer": "No. The depletion of water, oil, or gas from a common basin by a perpendicular well dug on neighboring land is not a trespass."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A librarian locks all doors before leaving, unaware that a customer is still inside. Can the customer claim false imprisonment?", "answer": "No. The customer cannot claim false imprisonment because the librarian did not intend to confine the customer or know with substantial certainty that the customer would be confined."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "For false imprisonment, what must the defendant intend?", "answer": "For false imprisonment, the defendant must intend to confine the plaintiff or know with substantial certainty that the plaintiff would be confined by the defendant's actions. The tort of false imprisonment cannot be committed merely by negligent or reckless acts."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A five-year-old child bites a stranger's leg, resulting in an injury requiring stitches. Is the child liable for battery?", "answer": "Yes. The child is liable for battery because the child intended to use his teeth against the stranger and such contact would be considered harmful and offensive to a person with average sensibilities."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "For battery, what satisfies the element of intent?", "answer": "For battery, the element of intent is satisfied if the defendant knows with substantial certainty that his act will result in a harmful or offensive contact. A minor is liable just as any other person when he has committed an intentional tort with force."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A four-year-old boy throws a neighbor's cat to see if it can land on its feet. The cat is unharmed. Can the neighbor claim trespass to chattels?", "answer": "No. The neighbor cannot claim trespass to chattels because the cat did not suffer any injury and the neighbor was not deprived of the use of the chattel for a substantial amount of time."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When does intentional intermeddling with a chattel constitute a trespass?", "answer": "Intentional intermeddling with a chattel constitutes a trespass only if the chattel is thereby harmed, or the possessor is deprived of the use of the chattel, or the possessor suffers bodily harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant enters a plaintiff's room with a crowbar to attack him while the plaintiff is sleeping. Is this an assault?", "answer": "No. There is no intentional tort of assault because there was no apprehension of imminent offensive contact while the plaintiff was sleeping."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes assault in tort law?", "answer": "Assault is defined as the intentional act of causing a reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact. The plaintiff must have anticipated contact and known of the defendant's act in order to apprehend the contact. Without awareness, there can be no apprehension and thus, no assault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A bank refuses to return collateral worth $10,000 due to a mistake. The collateral is now worth $7,000. Can the borrower recover in a conversion action?", "answer": "Yes. The borrower can recover $10,000 in a conversion action because the proper measure of damage for conversion is the full market value of the chattel at the time of conversion when the bank refused to return the collateral."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes conversion in tort law?", "answer": "Conversion is an intentional exercise of dominion or control over a chattel that so seriously interferes with the right of another to control it that the actor may justly be required to pay the full value of the chattel at the time it was converted."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What claim is most likely to result in the greatest monetary recovery for the plaintiff if the defendant intentionally kills the plaintiff's pet, causing great emotional distress?", "answer": "The claim most likely to result in the greatest monetary recovery for the plaintiff is intentional infliction of mental suffering/emotional distress."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A smoker blows cigarette smoke onto the plaintiff. Does the reasonableness of the smoker's conduct affect the liability in a battery action?", "answer": "No. Whether the smoker's conduct was reasonable or not has no bearing on the defendant's liability since battery actions only require that the defendant intended to make a harmful or offensive contact with the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does the degree or reasonableness of the battery matter in a tort action for battery?", "answer": "No. In a tort action for battery, the degree or reasonableness of the battery doesn't matter. It is no defense to say that the touching didn't last long or that force used was minimal or injury was not great."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is lightly touching another person on purpose to gently give them notice considered assault or battery?", "answer": "No. Lightly touching another person on purpose to gently give them notice is not considered assault or battery since it is a part of everyday life."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can an owner out of possession be subject to a suit for trespass for entry upon the land?", "answer": "Yes. An owner out of possession may be subject to a suit for trespass for entry upon the land, with the lessee entitled to compensatory damages, plus punitive damages if there is malicious intent by the owner, and injunctive relief if the trespass is ongoing."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a tort action for assault succeed if the plaintiff knew the defendant's actions did not present a danger and the plaintiff was not in fear of imminent bodily contact?", "answer": "No. A tort action for assault will fail if the plaintiff knew the defendant's actions did not present a danger and the plaintiff was not in fear of imminent bodily contact."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is it battery if you intentionally push another person, even if you thought you were helping the person, but the person was not in danger and you should have known?", "answer": "Yes. It is battery if you intentionally push another person, even if you thought you were helping the person, but the person was in fact not in danger and you should have known."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a defendant guilty of negligent infliction of emotional distress if the plaintiff suffers physical harm as a direct result of the defendant's negligent act?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is guilty of negligent infliction of emotional distress if the plaintiff suffers physical harm as a direct result of the defendant's negligent act."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is taking your neighbor's property without permission considered conversion?", "answer": "Yes. Taking your neighbor's property without permission is considered conversion, and the neighbor is entitled to the fair market value of the personal property if it has been lost or destroyed."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a patient consents to one doctor to perform surgery but a different doctor performs the surgery, is the doctor who performed the surgery liable for battery?", "answer": "Yes. The doctor who performed the surgery will be liable to the patient for battery if the patient consented to a different doctor to perform the surgery."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will an action for intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress succeed if no reasonable person could conclude that the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous?", "answer": "No. An action for intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress will be dismissed if no reasonable person could conclude that the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous as to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a private individual liable for false imprisonment if he reasonably believes that he is detaining a felon?", "answer": "No. A private individual is not liable for false imprisonment if he reasonably believes that he is detaining a felon."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a driver almost hits a parent and child with his car, causing severe emotional distress to the parent, can the driver be liable for negligent infliction of emotional distress if he was driving negligently?", "answer": "Yes. A driver can be liable for negligent infliction of emotional distress if he almost hits a parent and child with his car, causing severe emotional distress to the parent, if he was driving negligently."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can entry onto another's land that is normally trespassing be justified by necessity to save goods and/or people in danger of destruction?", "answer": "Yes. Entry onto another's land that is normally trespassing may be justified by necessity to save goods and/or people in danger of destruction."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "To recover under intentional infliction of emotional distress against a creditor, what must be shown?", "answer": "To recover under intentional infliction of emotional distress against a creditor, there must be emotional distress, and it must be severe, and there must be a pattern of abuse and extreme conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "To recover under intentional infliction of emotional distress, what must be proven?", "answer": "To recover under intentional infliction of emotional distress, there must be emotional distress, and it must be severe. No physical harm is required."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "To recover under intentional infliction of emotional distress, is it necessary to prove physical injuries?", "answer": "No. To recover under intentional infliction of emotional distress, there must be emotional distress, and it must be severe. Although physical injuries are not required, actual damages must be proven."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a pure verbal threat considered assault?", "answer": "No. A pure verbal threat is not considered assault. There must also be some overt action that threatens immediate physical harm to the victim such as shaking a fist or drawing a gun."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a person enters onto your land without permission, are they liable for damages to the land?", "answer": "Yes. If a person enters onto your land without permission, they are liable for damages to the land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a third party recover for intentional infliction of emotional distress if the actor does not know of the third party's presence?", "answer": "No. A third party cannot recover for intentional infliction of emotional distress if the actor does not know of the third party's presence because the actor lacks the intent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are children generally liable for their intentional torts?", "answer": "Yes. Children are generally liable for their intentional torts."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes infliction of mental distress in tort law?", "answer": "A person is guilty of infliction of mental distress if he commits an intentional act of outrageous conduct causing emotional distress which results in severe mental distress."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a person guilty of battery if he slams a door shut, knowing it would strike another person?", "answer": "Yes. A person is guilty of battery if he slams a door shut thereby striking another, and the person was substantially certain it would strike the victim."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a person threatened by another recover on a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress if the plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress?", "answer": "Yes. A person threatened by another can recover on a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress if the plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress as a consequence of the defendant's conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "To establish a claim based on false imprisonment, what must the plaintiff show?", "answer": "To establish a claim based on false imprisonment, the plaintiff must show that the defendant either intended to confine him, or at least that the defendant knew with substantial certainty that the plaintiff would be confined by the defendant's actions. Being inadvertently locked in will not suffice."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an intentional tortfeasor liable if the tortfeasor commits an act knowing there is a substantial certainty that the act will cause some type of injury?", "answer": "Yes. An intentional tortfeasor is liable if the tortfeasor commits an act knowing that there is a substantial certainty that the act will cause some type of injury, even embarrassment."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes battery in tort law?", "answer": "A battery occurs if a defendant acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact to another person and offensive or harmful contact actually results, either directly or indirectly."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is it considered assault if a person runs up to another person in a car at a traffic light, causing apprehension of harmful or offensive contact?", "answer": "Yes. Intentionally running up to a person in a car at a traffic light may be considered assault if it causes apprehension of harmful or offensive contact."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If you discuss an act that is considered assault and others commit it without your authorization or not under your control, are you guilty of assault?", "answer": "No. If you discuss an act that is considered assault and others commit it without your authorization or not under your control, you are not guilty of assault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If you intend to frighten someone but accidentally hurt them, is the motive relevant in determining whether you committed battery through transferred intent?", "answer": "No. The motive is irrelevant. If you intend to frighten someone but accidentally hurt them, you have committed battery through transferred intent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can you assert a claim of assault against a dog owner if you reasonably believe that a dog might bite you because the owner directed the dog at you?", "answer": "Yes. If you reasonably believe that a dog might bite you because the dog owner directed the dog at you, you can assert a claim of assault against the dog owner."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes malicious assault in tort law?", "answer": "Malicious assault occurs where the defendant recklessly causes physical injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is mistake of borders a defense to trespass?", "answer": "No. Mistake of borders is not a defense to trespass. An encroachment is trespass even if the defendant thought it was his land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a person guilty of battery if he grabs the arm of a suspected trespasser but later finds out the person is not a trespasser?", "answer": "Yes. A person will be found guilty of battery if he grabs the arm of a suspected trespasser but later finds out the person is not a trespasser."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes battery when a defendant exceeds the scope of consent?", "answer": "A battery occurs when a defendant exceeds the scope of consent. For example, if a doctor operates on the patient's leg and decides to also fix the patient's nose, this is a battery."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a landowner use force to protect property if there is an immediate danger of theft, destruction, or trespass?", "answer": "Yes. If an owner or occupant in lawful possession of property has a reasonable belief that the property is in immediate danger from theft, destruction, or trespass, that person may use only as much force as is proportional and reasonably necessary to protect the property. If more force is used than is necessary, it constitutes assault and battery."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a person threaten deadly force against someone who is impeding a rescue to save a life?", "answer": "Yes. A person can threaten deadly force against someone who is impeding a rescue to save a life."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is deadly force permissible to apprehend a fleeing misdemeanor?", "answer": "No. Deadly force may not be used to apprehend a fleeing misdemeanor. If you use deadly force under the reasonable honest mistaken belief it was a fleeing felon, you are criminally liable for homicide if you kill him."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can the plaintiff prevail under an abnormally dangerous activity strict liability test if injured by display fireworks used by professionals in fireworks displays?", "answer": "Yes. The plaintiff can prevail under an abnormally dangerous activity strict liability test if injured by display fireworks used by professionals."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can there be a claim for negligence if the plaintiff is injured by recreational fireworks set off by another person?", "answer": "Yes. There may be a claim for negligence because fireworks can be dangerous and anyone failing to adhere to a standard of care of a reasonable person can be liable for any injuries that result."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The plaintiff is injured by display fireworks used by professionals in fireworks displays. Can the plaintiff prevail under an abnormally dangerous activity strict liability test?", "answer": "Yes. The plaintiff can prevail under an abnormally dangerous activity strict liability test."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The plaintiff is injured by recreational fireworks set off by another person. Is there a claim for negligence?", "answer": "Yes. There may be a claim for negligence because fireworks can be dangerous and anyone failing to adhere to a standard of care of a reasonable person can be liable for any injuries that result."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is a defendant subject to strict liability for an abnormally dangerous activity?", "answer": "A defendant will be subject to strict liability if he is engaged in an 'abnormally dangerous activity.' An activity is abnormally dangerous if it creates a foreseeable and highly significant risk of physical harm even when reasonable care is exercised and the activity is not commonly engaged in."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Fumigation gas spreads from one condominium unit to another because of negligently constructed walls. Is the fumigation company still held strictly liable?", "answer": "Yes. The fumigation company will still be held strictly liable because fumigation is an ultrahazardous activity that involves a risk of serious harm to the person, land, or chattels of others which cannot be eliminated by the exercise of the utmost care and is not a matter of common usage."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If two young men are drag racing down a public street and one of them collides with the plaintiff's car, are both defendants liable?", "answer": "Yes. Both defendants will be held liable even though only one of them actually came in contact with the car because the tortious conduct of one encouraged the tortious behavior of the other and the combination led to the harm caused."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Two young men are drag racing down a public street and one of them collides with the plaintiff's car. Are both defendants liable?", "answer": "Yes. Both defendants will be held liable even though only one of them actually came in contact with the car because the tortious conduct of one encouraged the tortious behavior of the other and the combination led to the harm caused."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What happens if two or more wrongful tortfeasors act in concert?", "answer": "If two or more wrongful tortfeasors act in concert, even if only one defendant directly causes the plaintiff's injuries, all the defendants will be held liable for the full amount of the damages, and the plaintiff can go against any or all defendants regardless of their relative percentage of fault."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff trespasses despite being aware of a vicious guard dog and is bitten. Is strict liability applicable?", "answer": "No. No strict liability attaches because the plaintiff's assumption of the risk of harm from the animal is a defense to strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff's contributory negligence in knowingly and unreasonably subjecting himself to the risk that a wild animal will do harm to his person is a defense to strict liability. Why?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff's contributory negligence in knowingly and unreasonably subjecting himself to the risk that a wild animal or an abnormally dangerous domestic animal will do harm to his person is a defense to strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is contributory negligence a defense to strict liability in the case of wild animals or abnormally dangerous domestic animals?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff's contributory negligence in knowingly and unreasonably subjecting himself to the risk that a wild animal or an abnormally dangerous domestic animal will do harm to his person, land, or chattels, is a defense to strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is there strict liability if a plaintiff trespasses and is bitten by a guard dog despite a warning sign?", "answer": "No. If the plaintiff is aware the dog is vicious but trespasses anyway and is bitten, no strict liability attaches even if the plaintiff had limited rights to be on the land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff sues a defendant for his broken neck because his car crashed into a tree after hitting a drum of extremely hazardous chemicals that fell from the defendant's truck. Will the strict liability claim succeed?", "answer": "No. The strict liability claim will fail because his neck injury was not caused by the hazardous nature of the chemical and a strict liability based on an abnormally dangerous activity requires the actual injury to be caused by the same type of risk that makes the activity abnormally dangerous in the first place."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a plaintiff sues a defendant for a broken neck caused by a car crash after hitting a drum of hazardous chemicals that fell from the defendant's truck, will the strict liability claim succeed?", "answer": "No. The strict liability claim will fail because the neck injury was not caused by the hazardous nature of the chemical, and a strict liability based on an abnormally dangerous activity requires the actual injury to be caused by the same type of risk that makes the activity abnormally dangerous in the first place."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is strict liability for injuries caused by abnormally dangerous activities limited to the kind of harm that makes the activity abnormally dangerous?", "answer": "Yes. Strict liability for injuries caused by abnormally dangerous activities is limited to the kind of harm that makes the activity abnormally dangerous."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A heavy tile blows off the roof of an explosives plant during a storm and injures a pedestrian. Does strict liability apply?", "answer": "No. Strict liability does not apply because the injury was not caused by the hazardous nature of the activity that makes it abnormally dangerous."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a heavy tile blows off the roof of an explosives plant during a storm and injures a pedestrian, does strict liability apply?", "answer": "No. Although the manufacture of explosives is an abnormally dangerous activity, strict liability does not apply because the injury was not caused by the hazardous nature of the activity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the owner of a wild animal or an abnormally dangerous animal strictly liable for the harm caused to a person subjected to fear of attack by the animal?", "answer": "Yes. An owner of a wild animal or an abnormally dangerous animal is strictly liable for the harm caused to a person subjected to fear of attack by the animal."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the owner of livestock such as cattle strictly liable for any damage done by his livestock, even if the owner was not negligent?", "answer": "Yes. An owner of livestock such as cattle is strictly liable for any damage done by his livestock, even if the owner was not negligent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can you recover if smoke from a chemical plant explosion ruins your crops?", "answer": "Yes. You can recover because it is an abnormally dangerous activity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Smoke from a chemical plant explosion ruins your crops. Can you recover under strict liability?", "answer": "Yes. You can recover under strict liability because it is an abnormally dangerous activity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The operation of a flammable gas storage facility is an abnormally dangerous activity. Will the owner be strictly liable for any damages?", "answer": "Yes. The owner will be strictly liable for any damages regardless of negligence because the operation of a flammable gas storage facility is an abnormally dangerous activity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are construction companies strictly liable for inherently dangerous conditions?", "answer": "No. Construction companies are not strictly liable for inherently dangerous conditions."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a chemical plant strictly liable if toxic gas escapes and kills a nearby resident, even if the plant was not negligent?", "answer": "Yes. If toxic gas escapes from a chemical plant killing a nearby resident, the chemical plant is strictly liable, even if the chemical plant was not negligent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a landowner strictly liable for domestic animals that have known dangerous propensities?", "answer": "Yes. A landowner is strictly liable for domestic animals that have known dangerous propensities."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an owner of a trespassing animal strictly liable for damages caused if it is foreseeable that the animal will trespass and cause damage?", "answer": "Yes. An owner of a trespassing animal is strictly liable for damages caused if it is foreseeable that the animal will trespass and cause damage."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an owner of dangerous animals strictly liable for injuries caused by the animal?", "answer": "Yes. An owner of dangerous animals is strictly liable for injuries caused by the animal, provided the injured person did nothing, voluntarily or consciously, to bring about the injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the possessor of livestock, including cattle, strictly liable for damages done by their trespassing animals?", "answer": "Yes. The possessor of livestock, including cattle, is strictly liable for damages done by their trespassing animals."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the operator of an aircraft subject to strict liability if physical harm occurs to another's land during the aircraft's ascent, descent, or from objects falling from the plane?", "answer": "Yes. The operator of an aircraft is subject to strict liability if physical harm occurs to another's land during the aircraft's ascent, descent, or from objects falling from the plane."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A person carrying on an ultra-hazardous activity is liable for harm even if the harm is caused by the unexpectable conduct of a third person, action of an animal, or operation of a force of nature. Does contributory negligence by the plaintiff bar recovery in strict liability?", "answer": "No. Contributory negligence by the plaintiff will not bar his recovery in strict liability, but a plaintiff's assumption of the risk of harm from such an abnormally dangerous activity is a defense that bars his recovery for the harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a defendant carrying on an ultra-hazardous activity liable for harm even if the harm is caused by the unexpectable conduct of a third person, action of an animal, or operation of a force of nature?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant carrying on an ultra-hazardous activity is liable for harm even if the harm is caused by the unexpectable conduct of a third person, action of an animal, or operation of a force of nature."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is assumption of the risk by the plaintiff a defense in strict liability cases involving ultra-hazardous activities?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff's assumption of the risk of harm from an abnormally dangerous activity is a defense that bars his recovery for the harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is contributory negligence by the plaintiff a defense in strict liability cases involving ultra-hazardous activities?", "answer": "No. Typically, contributory negligence by the plaintiff will not bar his recovery in strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff gets stuck on an elevator that stopped between floors due to a manufacturing defect, and then after waiting, decides to jump out and gets injured. Is the elevator maker strictly liable?", "answer": "No. The elevator maker is not strictly liable because the harm was not foreseeable. However, if the plaintiff was injured due to the elevator plummeting or a fire, strict liability would apply."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a plaintiff gets stuck on an elevator that stopped between floors due to a manufacturing defect and decides to jump out and gets injured, is the elevator maker strictly liable?", "answer": "No. The elevator maker is not strictly liable because the harm was not foreseeable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "To impose strict liability, must the harm be from a foreseeable or reasonably anticipated use?", "answer": "Yes. To impose strict liability, the harm must be from a foreseeable or reasonably anticipated use. Strict liability is limited to the type of harm that makes the conduct abnormally dangerous."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A state explosives inspector is injured while inspecting an in-state bomb-making factory due to a bomb that unexpectedly explodes. Can the factory use the defense of assumption of the risk?", "answer": "Yes. In a strict liability claim by the inspector against the factory, the factory's best defense is that the inspector assumed the risk of injury by voluntarily taking on a job that regularly exposes him to dangerous substances."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a state that regards bomb manufacturing as an abnormally dangerous activity, what is the best defense for a factory against a strict liability claim by an injured state explosives inspector?", "answer": "The factory's best defense is that the inspector assumed the risk of injury by voluntarily taking on a job that regularly exposes him to dangerous substances."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is assumption of the risk a defense to all strict liability torts?", "answer": "Yes. Assumption of the risk is a defense to all strict liability torts. If a plaintiff had options and still assumed the risk, strict liability will be cut off."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a final manufacturer liable if they combine nondefective components into a final defective product?", "answer": "Yes. The final manufacturer, as well as any intervening wholesalers and retailers, are liable in strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a manufacturer liable if a defective component produced by another is incorporated into a finished product?", "answer": "Yes. Both the manufacturers of the component part and the finished product, as well as any intervening retailers and wholesalers, are liable in strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Where a manufacturer incorporates a defective component produced by another into a finished product, who is liable in strict liability?", "answer": "Both the manufacturers (of the component part and the finished product) as well as any intervening retailers and wholesalers are liable in strict liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a drug manufacturer be liable if it adequately warns the prescribing physicians of the dangers of a drug?", "answer": "No. The manufacturer is shielded from liability if it adequately warns the prescribing physicians of the dangers of the drug."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does the learned intermediary doctrine apply to non-prescription drugs?", "answer": "No. The learned intermediary doctrine does not apply to non-prescription drugs or where the drug company, by its mass advertising, is creating the demand for the product."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The manufacturer of a prescription allergy pill advised prescribing physicians of a remote risk of permanent loss of eyesight. If a doctor fails to inform the patient of such risks, and the patient loses their sight, does the patient have a claim against the drug manufacturer?", "answer": "No. The patient has a claim against the doctor, but not the drug manufacturer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the learned intermediary doctrine, does a drug manufacturer have a duty to warn the ultimate consumer of a prescription drug?", "answer": "No. Under the learned intermediary doctrine, a drug manufacturer only has a duty to warn the doctor, not the ultimate consumer of a prescription drug. The manufacturer is shielded from liability if it adequately warns the prescribing physicians of the dangers of the drug."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Under the learned intermediary doctrine, does a drug manufacturer have a duty to warn the ultimate consumer of a prescription drug?", "answer": "No. Under the learned intermediary doctrine, a drug manufacturer only has a duty to warn the doctor, not the ultimate consumer of a prescription drug."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff's phone spontaneously catches fire and is completely destroyed, causing no personal injury or property damage. Can the plaintiff sue in tort to recover for the economic loss?", "answer": "No. The plaintiff cannot sue in tort to recover for purely monetary loss, which is the cost of repair or replacement of the defective phone, since there was no physical injury or property damage."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does the economic loss rule prohibit tort recovery when a product damages itself, causing economic loss, but does not cause personal injury or damage to any property other than itself?", "answer": "Yes. The economic loss rule prohibits tort recovery when a product damages itself, causing economic loss, but does not cause personal injury or damage to any property other than itself because economic losses are disappointed economic expectations, which are protected by contract law, rather than tort law."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A dairy farmer using a milking system loses significant revenue because the system never operated properly due to a manufacturing defect. Does the farmer have a viable strict products liability claim against the manufacturer?", "answer": "No. The farmer does not have a viable strict products liability claim against the manufacturer since there were no damages or injuries, but only lost revenue."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can you recover pure economic damages for negligence and strict liability without property damages or personal injuries?", "answer": "No. For negligence and strict liability, you can only recover pure economic damages if you also have property damages or personal injuries."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A manufacturer is NOT responsible for injuries resulting from substantial alterations to, or modifications of a product by a third party that render the product defective or otherwise unsafe. Are there any exceptions to this rule?", "answer": "Yes. A manufacturer is not responsible for injuries resulting from substantial alterations to or modifications of a product by a third party that render the product defective or otherwise unsafe, except where the product is purposefully manufactured to permit or encourage its use without a designed safety feature."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A snow blower is improperly repaired after it left the manufacturer's control and the operating manual contained a warning against making the very repair performed. Is the manufacturer liable in strict liability?", "answer": "No. The manufacturer is not liable even if the repairman didn't have the manual available."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does a manufacturer's duty to deliver a safe product to the market free of manufacturing defects extend to everyone in the chain of distribution?", "answer": "Yes. A manufacturer's duty to deliver a safe product to the market free of manufacturing defects is non-delegable, and thus there is strict liability for it. Anyone in the chain of distribution is strictly liable to the purchaser for manufacturing defects."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A ceiling fan manufacturer will not be found liable if the plaintiff falls off a ladder while installing the ceiling fan. Why?", "answer": "The ceiling fan manufacturer will not be found liable because the defendant has no duty to warn or provide instruction about the obvious danger of falling off a ladder when using it to install a ceiling fan."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a ceiling fan manufacturer be found liable if the plaintiff falls off a ladder while installing the ceiling fan?", "answer": "No. The ceiling fan manufacturer will not be found liable because the defendant has no duty to warn or provide instruction about the obvious danger of falling off a ladder when using it to install a ceiling fan."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a manufacturer or seller liable if a product-related danger is obvious or the person entitled to a warning knows or should know of the danger?", "answer": "No. A manufacturer or seller has no duty to warn of a product-related danger which is obvious or of which the person who claims to be entitled to a warning knows, should know, or should, in using the product, discover."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a manufacturer or seller responsible for warning of a product-related danger which is obvious or of which the person who claims to be entitled to a warning knows, should know, or should, in using the product, discover?", "answer": "No. A manufacturer or seller has no duty to warn of a product-related danger which is obvious or of which the person who claims to be entitled to a warning knows, should know, or should, in using the product, discover."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A manufacturer sells a product that is dangerous without a safety device and it is feasible to install the device. Will the manufacturer be found guilty of negligence if he sells the product without the safety device, even if he warns the buyer?", "answer": "Yes. A manufacturer will be found guilty of negligence if he sells the product without the safety device, even if he warns the buyer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a manufacturer guilty of negligence if a product is dangerous without a safety device and it is feasible to install the device?", "answer": "Yes. A manufacturer will be found guilty of negligence if he sells the product without the safety device, even if he warns the buyer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a plaintiff recover if their expert testifies that a product was defectively designed but could not determine whether the accident was caused by the design defect or a manufacturing defect?", "answer": "Yes. Neither side is entitled to a directed verdict and the case should be sent to a jury because a jury reasonably could conclude that the harm was probably caused by a defect present in the product when it was sold."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a medical professional be held strictly liable for defective medical equipment that he uses on a patient?", "answer": "No. A medical professional cannot be held strictly liable for defective medical equipment that he uses on a patient since the medical professional is not in the business of selling the equipment."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a store selling a product that has a manufacturing defect making it dangerous to the consumer strictly liable for the injuries the product causes, even if the consumer was contributorily negligent?", "answer": "Yes. A store selling a product that has a manufacturing defect making it dangerous to the consumer is strictly liable for the injuries the product causes, even if the consumer was contributorily negligent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In an action based on strict liability in tort for failure to warn, to what standard is a defendant held?", "answer": "In an action based on strict liability in tort for failure to warn, a defendant is held to the standard of a prudent manufacturer who knew of or should have known the risks at the time the product was delivered."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does strict liability apply to auctioneers?", "answer": "No. Strict liability theory affects manufacturers or suppliers who are normally engaged in selling the product, but it does not apply to auctioneers."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a plaintiff injured by a design defect succeed in a negligence cause of action against an engineer whose work was unrelated to the design defect?", "answer": "No. The plaintiff will not succeed since the engineer owed no duty to the plaintiff to prevent that particular risk of harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "In a strict liability action, what must a plaintiff present to avoid a directed verdict?", "answer": "In a strict liability action, a plaintiff must present a prima facie case such that a jury could find that the defendant produced an unreasonably dangerous defect that was a proximate cause of the accident."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a manufacturer that makes a defective product be held strictly liable if the product causes a foreseeable injury to the user, even if the user was committing a crime at the time of the injury?", "answer": "Yes. A manufacturer that makes a defective product can be held strictly liable if the product causes a foreseeable injury to the user, even if the user was committing a crime at the time of the injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can any commercial supplier be held strictly liable for a plaintiff's injuries from a commercial product if the product is dangerously defective?", "answer": "Yes. Under a strict liability theory, any commercial supplier may be held strictly liable for a plaintiff's injuries from a commercial product if the product is dangerously defective."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can you recover from the retailer if you can recover from the manufacturer because the product had an unreasonably dangerous defect when it left the manufacturer's control?", "answer": "Yes. Under strict liability, you can recover from the retailer. It is not relevant that the defect was created earlier in the distribution chain."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is it relevant that the defect in a product was created earlier in the distribution chain for strict liability to apply to the retailer?", "answer": "No. Under strict liability, if you can recover from the manufacturer because the product had an unreasonably dangerous defect when it left the manufacturer's control, you can also recover from the retailer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can you recover pure economic damages only for negligence and strict liability?", "answer": "No. For negligence and strict liability, you cannot recover pure economic damages only."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is the designer of a defectively designed product liable for indemnity to the manufacturer?", "answer": "Yes. The designer of a defectively designed product is liable for indemnity to the manufacturer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A manufacturer is sued for strict liability after an injury caused by an intervening event. The injury was foreseeable to the manufacturer. Will the claim succeed?", "answer": "Yes. A claim based on strict liability will succeed against the manufacturer even if the injury was due to intervening causes, so long as the resulting injury from the intervening causes was foreseeable to the manufacturer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Will a claim based on strict liability succeed against the manufacturer if the injury was due to intervening causes?", "answer": "Yes. A claim based on strict liability will succeed against the manufacturer even if the injury was due to intervening causes, so long as the resulting injury from the intervening causes was foreseeable to the manufacturer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A seller fails to discover a defect in a product that would have been found with reasonable care. Is the seller negligent?", "answer": "Yes. A seller is negligent if the product was defective, and the defect would have been discovered if the seller had exercised reasonable care in inspecting the product."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A manufacturing defect could have been discovered through reasonable inspection by the manufacturer. Can a claim of negligence be asserted?", "answer": "Yes. If a manufacturing defect could have been discovered through the exercise of reasonable care by the manufacturer through a reasonable inspection, a claim of negligence can be asserted."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff seeks to recover pure economic loss through an action for strict liability. Will the action succeed?", "answer": "No. Actions for strict liability may not be used to recover pure economic loss."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product was defectively made and causes injury. Can a claim based on strict liability be asserted against the manufacturer?", "answer": "Yes. If a product was defectively made and causes injury, you can assert a claim based on strict liability against the manufacturer for damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product was defectively designed and the defect results in injury. Can a claim based on strict liability be asserted against the manufacturer?", "answer": "Yes. If a product was defectively designed and the defect results in injury, a claim based on strict liability can be asserted against the manufacturer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A store reconditions tools and sells them. The consumer did not know the product was damaged. Is the store liable for injuries under strict liability?", "answer": "Yes. A store that reconditions tools and sells them is liable for injuries under strict liability unless the consumer knew that the product was damaged."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product was defective and unreasonably dangerous to consumers. Can a claim based on strict liability be asserted against the manufacturer?", "answer": "Yes. To assert a claim based on strict liability against a manufacturer, it must be shown that the product was defective and unreasonably dangerous to consumers."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must be shown to assert a claim based on strict liability against a manufacturer?", "answer": "To assert a claim based on strict liability against a manufacturer, it must be shown that the product was defective and unreasonably dangerous to consumers."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product fails because of a defect that was present when it left the factory. Can a claim of strict liability be asserted?", "answer": "Yes. To assert a claim of strict liability, the product must fail because of a defect that was present when the product left the factory."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is required to assert a claim of strict liability?", "answer": "To assert a claim of strict liability, the product must fail because of a defect that was present when the product left the factory."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can subsequent suppliers seek indemnity in a strict liability cause of action?", "answer": "Yes. In a strict liability cause of action, subsequent suppliers can seek indemnity from parties before them in the supply chain so that the actual party responsible for the defect is held liable for it."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Subsequent suppliers seek indemnity in a strict liability cause of action. Can they seek indemnity from parties before them in the supply chain?", "answer": "Yes. In a strict liability cause of action, subsequent suppliers can seek indemnity from parties before them in the supply chain so that the actual party responsible for the defect is held liable for it."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A store reconditions tools and sells them. Does strict liability in tort apply to the store?", "answer": "Yes. Strict liability in tort applies to a store that reconditions tools and sells them."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does strict liability in tort apply to a store that reconditions tools and sells them?", "answer": "Yes. Strict liability in tort applies to a store that reconditions tools and sells them."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A storage container explodes due to the builder's failure to inspect for defects. Is the builder liable?", "answer": "Yes. The builder of a storage container that explodes will be liable for its own affirmative negligence, such as an awareness of defects in the tank or a failure to inspect for defects."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When will the builder of a storage container that explodes be liable?", "answer": "The builder of a storage container that explodes will be liable for its own affirmative negligence, such as an awareness of defects in the tank or a failure to inspect for defects."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product has a design hazard. The magnitude of the danger outweighs the utility of the product. Is the product defective under the risk/utility test?", "answer": "Yes. In the case of a design hazard, the risk/utility test must be applied. Under this test, a product is defective if the magnitude of the danger outweighs the utility of the product."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What test must be applied in the case of a design hazard?", "answer": "In the case of a design hazard, the risk/utility test must be applied. Under this test, a product is defective if the magnitude of the danger outweighs the utility of the product."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A warning is only placed on the box of a product, which is commonly discarded. Is the manufacturer strictly liable for inadequate labeling?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant is strictly liable for a product if the warning issued to the consumer is inadequate. For example, if a warning is only placed on the box, but the box is commonly discarded, a manufacturer can be found strictly liable for inadequate labeling since he failed to place a warning on the product."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is a defendant strictly liable for a product?", "answer": "A defendant is strictly liable for a product if the warning issued to the consumer is inadequate. For example, if a warning is only placed on the box, but the box is commonly discarded, a manufacturer can be found strictly liable for inadequate labeling since he failed to place a warning on the product."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product was as safe as possible, consistent with its purpose, and its benefits exceeded its risks. Will an action for strict liability succeed?", "answer": "No. An action for strict liability will fail if the product was as safe as possible, consistent with its purpose, and its benefits exceeded its risks."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When will an action for strict liability fail?", "answer": "An action for strict liability will fail if the product was as safe as possible, consistent with its purpose, and its benefits exceeded its risks."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product was being put to an improper use. Is this a defense to a claim based on strict liability in tort?", "answer": "Yes. A defense to a claim based on strict liability in tort is that the product was being put to an improper use."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is a defense to a claim based on strict liability in tort?", "answer": "A defense to a claim based on strict liability in tort is that the product was being put to an improper use."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product was changed or modified after it left the factory. Will a claim of strict liability against the manufacturer succeed?", "answer": "No. A claim of strict liability against a manufacturer will fail if the product was changed or modified after it left the factory."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When will a claim of strict liability against a manufacturer fail?", "answer": "A claim of strict liability against a manufacturer will fail if the product was changed or modified after it left the factory."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A product is in substantially the same condition at the time the injury occurred as when it was purchased from a retailer. Can a claim based on strict liability be asserted against the manufacturer?", "answer": "Yes. To assert a claim based on strict liability against a manufacturer, the product must be in substantially the same condition at the time the injury occurred as when it was purchased from a retailer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What condition must the product be in to assert a claim based on strict liability against a manufacturer?", "answer": "To assert a claim based on strict liability against a manufacturer, the product must be in substantially the same condition at the time the injury occurred as when it was purchased from a retailer."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A chemical factory occasionally emits unpleasant odors that disturb a next-door neighbor. Is this a private nuisance?", "answer": "It depends. A private nuisance is an unreasonable interference with a right of a particular person (or small number of persons) in the use and enjoyment of their land. Whether the invasion is unreasonable is a question to be determined by the trier of fact."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is a private nuisance?", "answer": "A private nuisance is an unreasonable interference with a right of a particular person (or small number of persons) in the use and enjoyment of their land. A thing may be a nuisance because it gives offense to the senses, even though it does not affect the health of the occupants of adjoining dwellings or damage or affect the value of the property. However, a thing is not a nuisance merely because it is unsightly, offends the aesthetic sense, makes the vicinity less attractive, or creates mental discomfort."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff moves next to a factory and claims nuisance due to emissions. Will the fact that the plaintiff 'came to the nuisance' defeat the claim?", "answer": "No. A nuisance claim is not defeated if the plaintiff came to the nuisance, but this factor should be weighed in favor of the defendant."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "How does a court determine if a defendant unreasonably interferes with the plaintiff's use or enjoyment of the property in a nuisance claim?", "answer": "In a nuisance claim, to determine if the defendant unreasonably interferes with the plaintiff's use or enjoyment of the property, the court will balance all the factors that weigh in the plaintiff's favor versus those that weigh in defense of the defendant. The jury will then determine whether the nuisance is unreasonable. A nuisance claim is not defeated if the plaintiff came to the nuisance, but this factor should be weighed in favor of the defendant."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A homeowner who works nights cannot sleep during the day because of a faint noise from a nearby factory. Does the homeowner have an actionable nuisance claim?", "answer": "No. A hypersensitive plaintiff will not be able to recover for nuisance no matter how great the harm to the plaintiff's use and enjoyment, if an ordinarily sensitive person would not be unduly bothered."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a hypersensitive plaintiff recover for nuisance?", "answer": "No. A hypersensitive plaintiff will not be able to recover for nuisance no matter how great the harm to the plaintiff's use and enjoyment, if an ordinarily sensitive person would not be unduly bothered."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A legally permitted brick kiln produces fumes that sicken customers on an adjacent property. Is this a private nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. A private nuisance occurs when a defendant substantially and unreasonably interferes with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his or her property. The interference need not directly damage the land or prevent its use in order to constitute a nuisance."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When does a private nuisance occur?", "answer": "A private nuisance occurs when a defendant substantially and unreasonably interferes with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his or her property. The interference need not directly damage the land or prevent its use in order to constitute a nuisance."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A factory's emissions cause significant harm to a normal member of the community. Is this a nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. Nuisance occurs if there is a substantial and unreasonable interference with a person's use and enjoyment of his property. The interference constitutes a nuisance if it causes significant harm of a kind that would be suffered by a normal member of the community."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes a nuisance?", "answer": "Nuisance occurs if there is a substantial and unreasonable interference with a person's use and enjoyment of his property. The interference constitutes a nuisance if it causes significant harm of a kind that would be suffered by a normal member of the community."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is loud noise and bright lights coming from a neighbor considered a private nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. Loud noise and bright lights coming from a neighbor is a private nuisance because it is a substantial and unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of one's land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Loud noise and bright lights coming from a neighbor interfere with the use or enjoyment of one's land. Is this a private nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. Loud noise and bright lights coming from a neighbor is a private nuisance because it is a substantial and unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of one's land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A neighbor does not maintain his property, endangering public health, safety, or welfare. Can this be argued as a public nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. The neighbor of a person who does not maintain his property may argue that the lack of maintenance is a public nuisance that endangers the public health, safety, or welfare."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can the lack of maintenance of a property be argued as a public nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. The neighbor of a person who does not maintain his property may argue that the lack of maintenance is a public nuisance that endangers the public health, safety, or welfare."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant disrupts the flow of a stream that flows through a person's property. Is this actionable under a nuisance theory?", "answer": "Yes. Disrupting the flow of a stream that flows through a person's property is actionable under a nuisance theory if the defendant unreasonably interfered with the use and enjoyment of the plaintiff's property."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is disrupting the flow of a stream that flows through a person's property actionable under a nuisance theory?", "answer": "Yes. Disrupting the flow of a stream that flows through a person's property is actionable under a nuisance theory if the defendant unreasonably interfered with the use and enjoyment of the plaintiff's property."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A person intentionally creates a condition that substantially and unreasonably interferes with a neighbor's use or enjoyment of his land. Can the person be subject to a private nuisance claim?", "answer": "Yes. A person who intentionally creates a condition that substantially and unreasonably interferes with a neighbor's use or enjoyment of his land can be subject to a private nuisance claim."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a person be subject to a private nuisance claim for intentionally creating a condition that interferes with a neighbor's use or enjoyment of his land?", "answer": "Yes. A person who intentionally creates a condition that substantially and unreasonably interferes with a neighbor's use or enjoyment of his land can be subject to a private nuisance claim."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Evidence shows that the aggrieved party did not 'come to the nuisance'. Does this have bearing in a private nuisance claim?", "answer": "Yes. In a claim based on private nuisance, evidence that the aggrieved party did not 'come to the nuisance' has some bearing, but it is not controlling."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A factory's actions regarding its emissions are reasonable, but the emissions still cause injury. What is the cause of action?", "answer": "If a factory's actions regarding its emissions are reasonable but the emissions still cause injury, the cause of action is nuisance, not negligence."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A public nuisance causes harm to plaintiffs that is different from that suffered by the public at large. Will the claim prevail?", "answer": "Yes. A public nuisance is a violation of a legal right that is common to the public as a group, and a claim based on public nuisance will prevail if the plaintiffs sustained harm different from that suffered by the public at large."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is a public nuisance?", "answer": "A public nuisance is a violation of a legal right that is common to the public as a group, and a claim based on public nuisance will prevail if the plaintiffs sustained harm different from that suffered by the public at large."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A factory deliberately releases fumes that cause personal injuries. Can a person sue for damages under a private nuisance cause of action?", "answer": "Yes. A person can sue for damages for personal injuries under a private nuisance cause of action if fumes are deliberately released by a factory."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a person sue for damages for personal injuries under a private nuisance cause of action if fumes are deliberately released by a factory?", "answer": "Yes. A person can sue for damages for personal injuries under a private nuisance cause of action if fumes are deliberately released by a factory."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a person sue for private nuisance if dust from a factory unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of their property, even if the plaintiff 'came to the nuisance'?", "answer": "Yes. A person can sue for private nuisance if dust from a factory unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of their property, even if the plaintiff 'came to the nuisance' by moving onto land next to an already operating source of interference."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Dust from a factory unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of a person's property. Can the person sue for private nuisance even if they 'came to the nuisance'?", "answer": "Yes. A person can sue for private nuisance if dust from a factory unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of their property, even if the plaintiff 'came to the nuisance' by moving onto land next to an already operating source of interference."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A person brings a private nuisance claim for obnoxious odors. Is this a valid claim?", "answer": "Yes. A private nuisance is a substantial and unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of one's land, and a private nuisance claim may be brought by an individual for obnoxious odors."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes a private nuisance?", "answer": "A private nuisance is a substantial and unreasonable interference with the use or enjoyment of one's land, and a private nuisance claim may be brought by an individual for obnoxious odors."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A private party suffers 'special damage' from a public nuisance. Can the private party institute an action for public nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. A private party may only institute an action for public nuisance if the private party suffers 'special damage' from the nuisance. The special damage must be of a different kind from that suffered by the public at large."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When may a private party institute an action for public nuisance?", "answer": "A private party may only institute an action for public nuisance if the private party suffers 'special damage' from the nuisance. The special damage must be of a different kind from that suffered by the public at large."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant makes repeated harassing phone calls to the plaintiff. Is this an actionable private nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. If a defendant makes repeated harassing phone calls to the plaintiff, it is an actionable private nuisance because it is an interference with the plaintiff's comfort."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are repeated harassing phone calls to the plaintiff an actionable private nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. If a defendant makes repeated harassing phone calls to the plaintiff, it is an actionable private nuisance because it is an interference with the plaintiff's comfort."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A private party suffers unique damage not suffered by the public at large. Is recovery available for public nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. Recovery is available for public nuisance only if a private party has suffered some unique damage not suffered by the public at large. There needs to be a claim for special damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is recovery available for public nuisance?", "answer": "Recovery is available for public nuisance only if a private party has suffered some unique damage not suffered by the public at large. There needs to be a claim for special damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and damages for a nuisance. Can the plaintiff obtain this relief?", "answer": "Yes. A plaintiff can obtain injunctive relief and damages for a nuisance."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What relief can a plaintiff obtain for a nuisance?", "answer": "A plaintiff can obtain injunctive relief and damages for a nuisance."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A public nuisance unreasonably interferes with the health, safety, or property rights of the community. Is this a valid claim?", "answer": "Yes. A public nuisance unreasonably interferes with the health, safety, or property rights of the community."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What does a public nuisance unreasonably interfere with?", "answer": "A public nuisance unreasonably interferes with the health, safety, or property rights of the community."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "The gravity of the harm caused by a nuisance outweighs the utility of the conduct. Is the nuisance considered unreasonable?", "answer": "Yes. A nuisance is unreasonable if the gravity of the harm caused outweighs the utility of the conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is a nuisance considered unreasonable?", "answer": "A nuisance is unreasonable if the gravity of the harm caused outweighs the utility of the conduct."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A private nuisance is offensive, inconvenient, or annoying to the average person in the community. Will the claim succeed?", "answer": "Yes. A private nuisance must be offensive, inconvenient, or annoying to the average person in the community. A private nuisance claim will not succeed if the plaintiff is especially sensitive."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a private nuisance be offensive, inconvenient, or annoying to?", "answer": "A private nuisance must be offensive, inconvenient, or annoying to the average person in the community. A private nuisance claim will not succeed if the plaintiff is especially sensitive."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Loud noise or putrid odors unreasonably and substantially interfere with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his land. Is this a private nuisance?", "answer": "Yes. A private nuisance occurs if there is loud noise or putrid odors that unreasonably and substantially interfere with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When does a private nuisance occur?", "answer": "A private nuisance occurs if there is loud noise or putrid odors that unreasonably and substantially interfere with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his land."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "An adverse effect to the plaintiff's property value is not present. Is this a requisite element of a nuisance action?", "answer": "No. An adverse effect to the plaintiff's property value is not a requisite element of a nuisance action."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is an adverse effect to the plaintiff's property value a requisite element of a nuisance action?", "answer": "No. An adverse effect to the plaintiff's property value is not a requisite element of a nuisance action."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A private investigator hired by the defendant pretends to be the plaintiff to gain access to the plaintiff's phone records. Is the defendant liable for intrusion upon seclusion?", "answer": "Yes. The tort of intrusion upon seclusion gives liability for intrusions upon one's private affairs, which would be offensive to a reasonable person. The tort may be committed in many ways, including tapping the plaintiff's phone, eavesdropping on the plaintiff, peeping through the plaintiff's window, searching the plaintiff's computer files, entering the plaintiff's hospital room after permission to enter has been denied, inspecting the plaintiff's shopping bag or purse, or forcing the plaintiff to submit to a drug test."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What does the tort of intrusion upon seclusion give liability for?", "answer": "The tort of intrusion upon seclusion gives liability for intrusions upon one's private affairs, which would be offensive to a reasonable person. The tort may be committed in many ways, including tapping the plaintiff's phone, eavesdropping on the plaintiff, peeping through the plaintiff's window, searching the plaintiff's computer files, entering the plaintiff's hospital room after permission to enter has been denied, inspecting the plaintiff's shopping bag or purse, or forcing the plaintiff to submit to a drug test."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A newspaper publishes an accurate representation of a newsworthy event, even if it is gruesome. Is this actionable?", "answer": "No. The media/press has a First Amendment right to publish an accurate representation of a newsworthy event, and even gruesome depictions of newsworthy events are not actionable if they are accurate."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does the media/press have a First Amendment right to publish an accurate representation of a newsworthy event?", "answer": "Yes. The media/press has a First Amendment right to publish an accurate representation of a newsworthy event, and even gruesome depictions of newsworthy events are not actionable if they are accurate."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant disseminates confidential or private information about a plaintiff that is likely to cause embarrassment. Is the defendant liable for the tort of disclosure?", "answer": "Yes. A defendant can be found liable for the tort of disclosure based on the widespread dissemination of confidential or private information about a plaintiff that is likely to cause embarrassment or hold the plaintiff up to ridicule or contempt. However, an exception to this general rule is that the First Amendment allows for disclosure of information that is newsworthy and there is a legitimate public interest or justification for disclosing the information."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When can a defendant be found liable for the tort of disclosure?", "answer": "A defendant can be found liable for the tort of disclosure based on the widespread dissemination of confidential or private information about a plaintiff that is likely to cause embarrassment or hold the plaintiff up to ridicule or contempt. However, an exception to this general rule is that the First Amendment allows for disclosure of information that is newsworthy and there is a legitimate public interest or justification for disclosing the information."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must be pleaded and proven in a cause of action for slander?", "answer": "In a cause of action for slander (spoken defamation), special damages must be pleaded and proven. The plaintiff must show actual out-of-pocket pecuniary loss suffered because of the defamation in terms of loss of business or some advantage the plaintiff would have gotten otherwise, unless the spoken defamation is slander per se involving: (1) imputation of a crime of a serious nature; (2) loathsome disease (AIDS); (3) business or trade; or (4) serious sexual misconduct or unchastity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant sells to a tabloid some information gained by opening the plaintiff's email after secretly observing the plaintiff type his email password. Can the plaintiff recover damages for intrusion upon seclusion?", "answer": "Yes. An action for intrusion upon seclusion can be brought if the defendant commits: (1) an intentional intrusion (physical or otherwise); (2) upon solitude, seclusion, or private affairs that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When can an action for intrusion upon seclusion be brought?", "answer": "An action for intrusion upon seclusion can be brought if the defendant commits: (1) an intentional intrusion (physical or otherwise); (2) upon solitude, seclusion, or private affairs that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A public official or public figure seeks to recover damages for libel or defamation. What must they show?", "answer": "In order to recover damages for libel or defamation, a public official or public figure must be able to show by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with actual malice."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a public official or public figure show to recover damages for libel or defamation?", "answer": "In order to recover damages for libel or defamation, a public official or public figure must be able to show by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with actual malice."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "An advertisement depicts a specific celebrity without their consent. Is this a violation of the common law right of publicity?", "answer": "Yes. The common law right of publicity is violated if an advertisement, when viewed as a whole, leaves little doubt that the ad is intended to depict a specific celebrity who has not consented to the use of his identity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is the common law right of publicity violated?", "answer": "The common law right of publicity is violated if an advertisement, when viewed as a whole, leaves little doubt that the ad is intended to depict a specific celebrity who has not consented to the use of his identity."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A publication is consented to, authorized, invited, or procured by the plaintiff. Is this defamation actionable?", "answer": "No. Defamation is not actionable where the publication is consented to, authorized, invited, or procured by the plaintiff, regardless of the plaintiff's injuries or the speaker's intent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is defamation actionable if the publication is consented to, authorized, invited, or procured by the plaintiff?", "answer": "No. Defamation is not actionable where the publication is consented to, authorized, invited, or procured by the plaintiff, regardless of the plaintiff's injuries or the speaker's intent."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A photograph of a well-known actor is used for commercial purposes without their permission. Is this an invasion of privacy?", "answer": "Yes. Making commercial use of a photograph of a well-known actor for your own use and benefit is an invasion of the actor's privacy by appropriation of his likeness."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is making commercial use of a photograph of a well-known actor for your own use and benefit an invasion of privacy?", "answer": "Yes. Making commercial use of a photograph of a well-known actor for your own use and benefit is an invasion of the actor's privacy by appropriation of his likeness."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A newspaper publishes a fair and accurate report of a newsworthy event. Is the newspaper liable for invasion of privacy?", "answer": "No. A newspaper will not be liable for invasion of privacy if the story was a fair and accurate report of a newsworthy event or based on a matter of public record."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A photograph of a person is used without their permission for profit. Is this an invasion of privacy?", "answer": "Yes. This is an invasion of privacy because it violates the individual's right to control the use of their likeness. This form of appropriation for commercial gain is one of the recognized categories of invasion of privacy."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff is called a deadbeat. Can the plaintiff prevail in a defamation suit without proving special damages?", "answer": "No. Since being called a deadbeat is not slander per se, a plaintiff will not prevail in a defamation suit unless he can prove special damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a plaintiff prevail in a defamation suit for being called a deadbeat without proving special damages?", "answer": "No. Since being called a deadbeat is not slander per se, a plaintiff will not prevail in a defamation suit unless he can prove special damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A photo of a public figure is recklessly shown endorsing a product, causing harm to the public figure. Is this defamatory per se?", "answer": "Yes. It is defamatory per se if you recklessly show a photo of a public figure supposedly endorsing your product and it harms the public figure."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is it defamatory per se to recklessly show a photo of a public figure supposedly endorsing your product if it harms the public figure?", "answer": "Yes. It is defamatory per se if you recklessly show a photo of a public figure supposedly endorsing your product and it harms the public figure."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "An employer had reasonable grounds for believing an employee was stealing, even if the employer was wrong. Is this defamation?", "answer": "No. It is not defamation if the employer had reasonable grounds for his belief that the employee was stealing, even if the employer was wrong, so long as the employer was not acting maliciously."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant reasonably believed his defamatory statement to be true. Is this defamation?", "answer": "No. It is not defamation if the defendant reasonably believed his defamatory statement to be true."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is it defamation if the defendant reasonably believed his defamatory statement to be true?", "answer": "No. It is not defamation if the defendant reasonably believed his defamatory statement to be true."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "If a bill collector calls you a worthless bum in front of your neighbors, what must you prove to prevail in an action for slander?", "answer": "You must prove special damages to prevail in an action for slander. Merely being called a worthless bum in front of your neighbors is insufficient without showing that you suffered some special damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A defendant's statement was true. Is this a defense in a defamation cause of action?", "answer": "Yes. In a defamation cause of action, proof that the defendant's statement was true is a defense by itself."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "An employer had reasonable grounds to believe an employee was not competent but was wrong. Is this defamation?", "answer": "No. It is not defamation if the defendant employer had reasonable grounds for his belief that the employee was not competent, even if the employer was wrong, due to the defense of qualified privilege."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is the defense of qualified privilege?", "answer": "The defense of qualified privilege allows false statements of fact made in good faith to be privileged. For example, it is not defamation if the defendant employer had reasonable grounds for his belief that the employee was not competent, even if the employer was wrong."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is truth a defense to defamation of a private person?", "answer": "Yes. For the defamation of a private person, truth is a complete defense, even if you did not reasonably believe it to be true."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the common defenses to intentional torts?", "answer": "Common defenses to intentional torts include consent, self-defense, defense of others, and defense of property."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the defenses to negligence?", "answer": "Defenses to negligence include contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and assumption of risk."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When can a plaintiff recover on a claim based on invasion of privacy?", "answer": "A plaintiff may recover on a claim based on invasion of privacy if a defendant publicizes the details of the plaintiff's private life, unless the information is related to a legitimate public concern."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Is a newspaper liable for defamation of a private person if it exercised ordinary care in determining the truth of the story?", "answer": "No. A newspaper is not liable for defamation of a private person if it exercised ordinary care in determining whether the story was true or false."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What doctrines allow a jury to find multiple defendants liable when the plaintiff cannot show which defendant's conduct caused the injury?", "answer": "Three doctrines allow a jury to find multiple defendants liable even if the plaintiff cannot show which defendant\u2019s conduct caused the injury: (1) Doctrine of Alternative Liability, (2) Doctrine of Joint Enterprise, and (3) Doctrine of Market Share Liability."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is a newspaper not liable for defamation of a private person?", "answer": "A newspaper is not liable for defamation of a private person if it exercised ordinary care in determining whether the story was true or false."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the elements of a defamation claim?", "answer": "The elements of a defamation claim are: (1) a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff; (2) an unprivileged publication to a third party; (3) fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the publisher; and (4) either actionability of the statement irrespective of special harm or the existence of special harm caused by the publication."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When does defamation of a private person occur?", "answer": "Defamation of a private person occurs if the defendant has substantial doubts about the accuracy of the information he is conveying."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the elements required to prove a prima facie case of defamation?", "answer": "To prove a prima facie case of defamation, the plaintiff must show: (1) a false defamatory statement of and concerning the plaintiff made by the defendant; (2) publication by the defendant to a third party; and (3) damages. For slander, the plaintiff always needs to prove special damages unless the statement falls within one of the slander per se categories. For libel, the plaintiff does not need to prove special damages unless the statement does not fall within one of the slander per se categories and the defamatory nature of the statement is not clear on its face."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is required for a cause of action for defamation?", "answer": "A cause of action for defamation requires that someone else hear it. If you defame someone in Russian, and no one knows Russian, there is no defamation."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "You defame someone in Russian, but no one understands Russian. Is there defamation?", "answer": "No. There is no defamation if you defame someone in Russian and no one knows Russian because a cause of action for defamation requires that someone else hear it."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the elements of a negligence claim based on a defective product?", "answer": "A negligence claim based on a defective product requires: (1) a duty owed to the plaintiff; (2) a breach of that duty; (3) causation (actual and proximate cause); and (4) damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is the publication requirement of slander satisfied?", "answer": "The publication requirement of slander is satisfied if it was made under circumstances where it was overheard, and the defendant should have reasonably foreseen that it would be overheard."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A plaintiff buys a car based on the defendant's false statement that it will pass inspection. Is this fraud?", "answer": "Yes. This is fraud because the plaintiff relied on the intentional misrepresentation of a material fact by the defendant, who knew the statement was false."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What are the scenarios in which a plaintiff may recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress?", "answer": "A plaintiff may recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress in three scenarios: (1) a near miss case, (2) a bystander claim, and (3) in certain situations where a pre-existing relationship exists. For a near miss case, there must be negligence by the defendant creating a foreseeable risk of physical injury, the plaintiff must be in the zone of danger, and the plaintiff must manifest physical symptoms. For a bystander claim, there must be negligence by the defendant, the plaintiff must be a contemporaneous witness to a negligent bodily injury inflicted on a close family member, and the plaintiff must manifest physical symptoms. Some jurisdictions do not require physical symptoms, and a few require that the plaintiff be in the zone of danger to recover."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What constitutes fraud?", "answer": "Fraud is intentional misrepresentation of a material fact, made knowingly, with intent to defraud, that is justifiably relied upon by the other party and causes injury to that party. A defrauded party may rescind the contract and get back any consideration paid, or retain the goods or value obtained and sue in tort for damages which is the lessened value because of the fraud."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a tort fraud action be maintained if a party to a contract makes a promise with no intention to perform?", "answer": "Yes. A tort fraud action can be maintained if a party to a contract makes a promise with no intention to perform. The elements of the tort of fraud are satisfied if a party fraudulently makes a material misrepresentation of fact on which the plaintiff had the right to rely, and actually did rely, which caused an injury."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When may a plaintiff recover in tort where a legal duty exists independent of a contractual obligation?", "answer": "A plaintiff may recover in tort where a legal duty exists independent of a contractual obligation. A tort fraud action can be maintained if a party to a contract makes a promise with no intention to perform. The elements of the tort of fraud are satisfied if a party fraudulently makes a material misrepresentation of fact on which the plaintiff had the right to rely, and actually did rely, which caused an injury. Since fraud is a contract tort, contract rules for damages apply."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A vaporizer is marketed as spill-proof, but a child is burned by spilled hot water. Is there a claim for misrepresentation?", "answer": "Yes. There is a claim for misrepresentation because a jury can find that the manufacturer intentionally and fraudulently represented that the vaporizer is spill-proof, and the plaintiff relied on that misrepresentation, resulting in damages."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When can a plaintiff assert a claim for fraudulent misrepresentation against a manufacturer?", "answer": "A plaintiff can assert a claim for fraudulent misrepresentation against a manufacturer if the manufacturer intentionally and fraudulently misrepresents a feature of a product, the plaintiff relies on that misrepresentation, and the misrepresentation results in damages (not just that the product didn't do what the manufacturer claimed)."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are damages for emotional distress recoverable in negligent misrepresentation actions?", "answer": "No. In negligent misrepresentation actions, pecuniary losses are recoverable, but damages for emotional distress are not, unless the misrepresentation involves a risk of physical harm."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Are statements of opinion or puffery actionable in a claim based on deceit?", "answer": "No. In a claim based on deceit, statements of the defendant that are mere opinion or puffery are not actionable."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is a person liable for intentional misrepresentation?", "answer": "A person is liable for intentional misrepresentation if he makes a misrepresentation with the knowledge the statement is false and with the intent to induce the plaintiff's reliance on the misrepresentation."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Does failure to disclose a material fact give rise to deceit?", "answer": "No. Failure to disclose a material fact does not give rise to deceit, except for parties in a confidential or fiduciary relationship who have a duty to disclose all material facts to avoid deceit."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "When is an action for negligent misrepresentation confined?", "answer": "An action for negligent misrepresentation is confined to misrepresentations made in a commercial setting, and liability will attach only if reliance by the particular plaintiff could be contemplated."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What is intentional misrepresentation?", "answer": "Intentional misrepresentation (i.e., fraud or deceit) is a misrepresentation of a knowingly false material fact with the intent to induce reliance by the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "A former employee convinces customers to cancel their contracts with his prior employer based on a misrepresentation. Is this tortious interference?", "answer": "Yes. The ex-employee will be found liable for tortious interference with contract because he intentionally and improperly interfered with his prior employer's contracts by convincing customers to cancel their existing contracts based on a misrepresentation."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "What must a plaintiff establish to succeed on a claim of tortious interference with contractual relations?", "answer": "To succeed on a claim of tortious interference with contractual relations, a plaintiff must establish four elements: (1) there was a contract between the plaintiff and a third party; (2) the defendant knew of the contract; (3) the defendant improperly induced the third party to breach the contract or made performance of the contract impossible; and (4) there was injury to the plaintiff."}
{"topic": "Torts", "question": "Can a tort cause of action for interference with a contract be between the parties to the contract?", "answer": "No. A tort cause of action based on interference with a contract cannot be between the parties to the contract. It must be between a party to the contract and a third person because claims of breach between parties to a contract are governed by contract law, not tort law."}