ABR FINAL

(A) The player can recover the $5,000 because the preexisting duty rule does not apply where the duty is owed to a third person.

A professional baseball player visited a sick boy in the hospital. The player told the boy that in consideration of the boy's courage, he would hit a home run for him in his next game. As the player was leaving the hospital, the boy's father stopped the player and told him how important the home run could be in improving his son's spirits and health. The father told the player he would pay him $5,000 if he did hit a home run in his next game. The player agreed and took extra batting practice before his next game to improve his chances. In his next game, the player hit two home runs. The player's contract with his ball club does not forbid him from accepting money from fans for good performance. The player has now asked the father for the $5,000.If the father refuses to pay and the baseball player brings an action against him for damages, which of the following is correct under the prevailing modern rule in contract law?

(A) Yes, because the contract is fully enforceable

A manufacturing company was in the business of making copper tubing. A retail seller telephoned the manufacturing company's sales department and placed an order, which the manufacturing company agreed to fulfill. The order was for 10,000 linear feet of copper tubing at a sale price of $2 per foot. The tubing was to be used in the production of a custom order for one of the retail seller's customers. The manufacturing company installed special equipment for the manufacture of the tubing to the retail seller's specifications and had completed a portion of the order when the retail seller again telephoned the sales department. This time, however, the retail seller canceled its order, saying it no longer had need of the tubing because its customer went bankrupt and refused to pay for the order.

(C) The criminal's act was a superseding force.

A mother brought her nine-year-old son to an indoor shopping mall. She was not planning on making any purchases that day, just spending some time with her son. When her son needed to use the men's restroom, his mother did some window shopping at the adjacent store. A criminal cornered the boy in the men's room and assaulted him. The criminal then quickly left the mall and has not been apprehended. The mother filed suit against the mall's owner on behalf of her son for the injuries he suffered.If the mall is found not liable, what is the likely reason?

(B) No, because the statements are communications protected by the attorney-client privilege.

A passenger train derailed, causing injuries to many passengers. Immediately following the accident, as ordered by the corporate owner of the train, the general counsel took statements from the train engineer and other employees on the train regarding what occurred, and wrote down what the employees said. Later, one of the injured passengers properly sued the corporation in federal court and sent interrogatories requesting the contents of the written statements taken by the corporate general counsel.Is the corporation required to answer the interrogatories?

(D) In-court comparison by the friend, a nonexpert, of the letter with another letter that the employee has admitted writing.

A plumbing contractor sued a homeowner, alleging that the homeowner refused to pay for extensive pipe repairs performed on her home by an employee of the contractor. The contractor called the employee to the stand as a witness. The employee, under oath, testified that he did not perform any work at the homeowner's home. The employee also denied writing a letter to a friend telling the friend that he was going to do plumbing work on the homeowner's house. Without releasing the employee as a witness, the contractor offers in evidence the letter written by the employee to his friend.Which of the following is NOT a proper basis for admitting the employee's letter?

(D) Yes, because the employee intended that her co-worker should ingest the drug.

An employee laced a co-worker's drink with a small quantity of a mild hallucinogen as a prank, expecting that her co-worker would have a minor vision or two and act in a comical manner. However, he had a severe reaction to the drug and experienced extreme hallucinations. The employee promptly brought her co-worker to the emergency room of a nearby hospital. The co-worker was put under observation for a couple of hours, but then was negligently released prematurely by the emergency room physician on duty. The next day, while driving, the co-worker had another powerful hallucination and drove his car into a bridge abutment. The co-worker sued the employee for his injuries.If the jury determines that the automobile accident was not reasonably foreseeable, will the co-worker's suit against the employee succeed?

(B) Yes, because supplemental jurisdiction may include claims that involve the joinder or intervention of additional parties.

An employee sued his employer in federal court in State B, alleging that the employer violated federal civil rights statutes by permitting a hostile work environment in which the employee was afraid to go to work due to harassment from a co-worker. The co-worker is from State A, and both the employer and employee are from State B. The employee properly joined the co-worker under the permissive party joinder rule. The law in State B provided the basis for the employee's claim against the co-worker, and neither claim exceeded $20,000.Does the federal court have supplemental jurisdiction over the employee's claim against the co-worker?

(A) The child will win, because a ride operator failed to use reasonable care in securing the seatbelt.

A child was severely injured at an amusement park when she was ejected from a ride that went slightly off its track. The ride malfunctioned as a result of a manufacturer's defect, but had the child been properly secured in the ride's seatbelt by one of the ride operators, she would not have been injured. The child was unable to identify which ride operator improperly buckled her in.In the child's suit against the amusement park, who will win?

(C) The case must be litigated through the state court system, but once a decision is rendered by the highest state appellate court, the United States Supreme Court would have subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal concerning the First Amendment issue.

A citizen of State A sued a local city newspaper for defamation in state court. The newspaper's defense is that the statements related to the citizen were protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.Which of the following statements regarding federal court subject matter jurisdiction is correct?

(C) The man did not know that he was striking a person.

A man with a long history of mental illness was subject to recurrent hallucinations and delusions involving a belief that aliens from another planet were about to attack him. When the man saw a pedestrian walking on the sidewalk in his direction, he pulled a bottle from his shopping bag and hurled it at her, striking her in the head and causing her injury. The pedestrian sued the man for battery.Which of the following, if true, provides the best defense for the man?

(B) There is a valid, enforceable contract between the manufacturer and the wholesaler, but it is limited to the terms of the manufacturer's offer.

A manufacturer of widgets sent an offer to a major wholesaler, offering a standard lot (quantity well-known in the widget trade) of widgets for $8,000. The president of the wholesaler personally mailed back to the manufacturer the wholesaler's standard printed acceptance form. However, the president wrote in large letters in his own hand on the form, "Our liability on this contract is limited to $200." Two days later, the manufacturer's sales manager received the communication from the wholesaler. A week later, the manufacturer had sent no additional communication to the wholesaler.What is the relationship between the parties?

(B) A police officer's testimony that the defendant has a general reputation in the community as a violent person.

The defendant is being tried for murder in the bludgeoning death of his brother. The defendant denies any involvement in the crime. He calls a witness to the stand, who testifies that, in his opinion, the defendant is a nonviolent, peaceable man.Which of the following, if offered by the prosecution, would most likely be admissible?

(B) Yes, because the tire was dangerously defective when it left the manufacturing plant.

A car owner purchased four new tires from a tire shop. The tires were manufactured by a reputable tire manufacturer. It was widely known in the tire industry that purchasers of tires would, on occasion, exceed posted speed limits, and therefore the tires were designed to perform at speeds higher than the maximum speed of 65 m.p.h. allowable in most states. The car owner then sold her car to a friend. The friend immediately took the car on a 500-mile trip. During the course of the journey, the friend often drove his car 10 m.p.h. over the posted limit of 65 m.p.h. As the friend approached his destination, he was driving 73 m.p.h. on smooth pavement. Suddenly his left front tire blew out because of a hidden defect in the tire. The car went out of control, crashed into another vehicle, and the friend was severely injured.If the friend sues the tire store in strict liability for his injuries in a jurisdiction that does not apply its comparative negligence rules to strict liability actions, is the friend likely to recover?

(D) The security guard was not a government agent.

A 12-year-old girl entered a grocery store. When she believed that no one was looking, she grabbed two candy bars and concealed them under her coat. As she attempted to leave the store, a security guard employed by the store grabbed the girl by the arm. He told her, "You're too young to be a thief!" The girl began crying and blurted out, "I lost my lunch money on the way to school and I was really hungry!"If the girl is charged with shoplifting, what is the prosecution's best argument that her Miranda rights have not been violated by the security guard?

(D) The wholesaler's incidental costs of preparing the paperwork and other office costs connected with preparing and packing the chairs for shipment to the dealer.

A dealer sent an e-mail to a wholesaler stating, "Send 500 'Granny Rocker' chairs at your usual price." The wholesaler responded, also by e-mail, "Will ship our last 500 'Granny Rocker' chairs at $100 per chair, our usual price. 'Granny Rocker' line is being discontinued." The wholesaler's staff immediately began the paperwork for processing the order and started preparing and packing the chairs for shipment. The dealer e-mailed back to the wholesaler, "Cancel order for 'Granny Rocker' chairs; your price is too high." The dealer had found a mill outlet that was the only other source of the chairs. Although the outlet's price was also $100 per chair, it was more convenient for the dealer to buy the chairs from the outlet. The day after receiving the dealer's cancellation, the wholesaler was able to sell the 500 "Granny Rocker" chairs in its stock to another party for $100 each. If the wholesaler sues the dealer for damages, how much should the wholesaler recover?

(A) Deny the motion, because the farmer failed to carry his initial burden of establishing a prima facie case for summary judgment.

A farmer brought a federal diversity action against a feed distributor, alleging that the feed deliveries sent by the distributor were less than the agreed-upon amount bargained and paid for. Following discovery, the farmer filed a motion for partial summary judgment, seeking a ruling solely on the issue that the contract had been breached. In support of the motion, the only evidence the farmer cited was the distributor's discovery responses, and noted that no evidence was presented to establish that the distributor complied with the contract. The distributor filed a response denying breach of contract, but did not provide any evidence in support of his response.If no other evidence is offered by either party, how should the court rule on the motion?

(B) The son loses, because the classmate is the father's tenant and not the son's.

A father owned a piece of property located near the state university. His son was a student at the university, and the father allowed the son and the son's classmate to live in the large house on the property rent free. On the son's 20th birthday, the father handed the son a signed instrument of conveyance containing the following language: "I give the property to my dearly beloved son on the condition precedent that he receive a college degree before he reaches the age of 30, and if he does not receive the degree by his 30th birthday, to my beloved daughter." The son promptly recorded the deed. Shortly thereafter, the son asked his classmate to start paying him rent. An argument evolved out of the son's request and the son told the classmate to get off his property. The classmate refused to leave and the son filed suit to evict him.How will the court rule?

(D) Congress could rationally conclude that an unemployed college student is less likely to be covered under an employer's coverage and thus more needy than an employed student.

A federal statute provides for subsidized health care benefits for all full-time college students who are also unemployed. The benefits terminate automatically if the recipient fails to enroll in college full-time in any two consecutive semesters or takes a job working more than 15 hours per week. A college student who had previously received the benefits was denied coverage when he reported that he had taken a full-time student teaching job his senior year, a requirement for his degree. The student did not receive health care benefits through his employer and was left with no coverage. The student filed suit in federal court to compel the government to continue providing him with the subsidized benefits while he finished his degree. He asserts, among other things, that there is no logical reason why he should be deprived of benefits when students in other fields who are not required to work as part of their degree program continue to receive them.Which of the following is the strongest ground for the government to defend the constitutionality of the federal statute in question?

(C) Deny the homeowner's motion and grant the electrical company's motion for a directed verdict, because the wire could have been damaged by another contractor.

A fire broke out in a home that had been recently remodeled, destroying the house and injuring the homeowner. An investigation by the fire marshal established that the fire started from a short in some wiring behind a wall. A small section of wiring that ran to an outlet through a narrow gap between a furnace chimney and a hot water pipe had had part of its outer sheath cut off. The homeowner filed suit against the electrical company that did the rough wiring.The parties stipulated for trial that the company had installed the wiring in compliance with the blueprints, and that the wiring had been inspected and approved by the building inspector before the chimney and the water pipe had been installed and the walls put up, all by different contractors. At trial, the homeowner introduced the report of the fire marshal establishing how the fire started, and evidence of his medical expenses and other damages. At the end of the homeowner's case, the electrical company's attorney rested her case and moved for a directed verdict. The homeowner's attorney also moved for a directed verdict.How should the court rule on the directed verdict motions?

(B) $2,000, which represents the difference between the plumber's bid and the amount she had to pay for the plumbing work.

A general contractor advertised in a trade publication that she planned to bid on the construction of a new building. The advertisement welcomed bids from subcontractors to perform various functions, such as plumbing, electrical work, and masonry. The lowest plumbing bid she received was from a plumber for $10,000. The general contractor used that bid in preparing her bid and submitted the bid to the client. Shortly thereafter, the plumber called her and explained that there was a mistake in his bid and he could not perform the work for less than $12,000. The general contractor was awarded the contract and told the plumber she was accepting his $10,000 bid, but the plumber reiterated that he would not do the work for less than $12,000. The general contractor hired a different company to do the plumbing work on the building at a cost of $12,000. She now sues the plumber for damages.What is she entitled to recover?

(C) Yes, in the amount of $400.

A girlfriend and boyfriend decided to get married. The girlfriend was one month short of her 18th birthday, and the boyfriend was 19. They went to a jeweler who made wedding rings to order and described what they were interested in. The girlfriend and boyfriend then signed a purchase order for two rings, a woman's band for $500 and a man's for $650. After the girlfriend's 18th birthday, the rings were ready. The girlfriend went to the jeweler and told him that they would not be needing the rings because she and the boyfriend had broken off their engagement. When he protested that they were custom-made and would probably not sell to anyone else, the girlfriend said, "All right, I've got $400 in my savings account. I'll take my ring, but you'll have talk to my boyfriend about the other one." The jeweler had the girlfriend sign another purchase order for the woman's band at $400, payment to be made by the end of the month. When the jeweler did not hear from the girlfriend after another month, he brought an action for breach of contract against her. Evidence produced at trial established that the market value of the rings was $500 and $650 for the woman's and man's rings, respectively, and that the age of majority in the jurisdiction was 18 Is the jeweler entitled to recover against the girlfriend?

(C) The specific Federal Rule of Civil Procedure will apply as long as both rules are consistent with the Rules Enabling Act and are not unconstitutional.

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

The homeowner, because she did not accept the gardener's offer to do the landscaping job for $1,000.

A homeowner offered a landscape gardener $1,000 to trim and reshape the bushes on her property if the gardener could finish the job before her garden party on June 1. The gardener told the homeowner that he would get back to her after he had checked his calendar. The next day, the gardener phoned the homeowner, who was not at home, and left a message on her voicemail that he had the time, but could not do the job for less than $1,200. The gardener did not hear from the homeowner for several days. As June 1 drew closer, the gardener phoned the homeowner again and left another message on her voice mail stating that "I'll do the job for $1,000, this weekend, unless that would be inconvenient." The homeowner replayed the second message just as she was leaving town on a business trip and did not contact the gardener. That weekend, unbeknownst to the homeowner, the gardener took his tools to the homeowner's house and trimmed and reshaped the bushes to the homeowner's specifications. When the homeowner returned from her trip several days later, the gardener presented her with a handwritten invoice for $1,000. If the homeowner refuses to pay the gardener, and the latter brings an action solely for breach of contract to recover the $1,000 contract amount, who will likely prevail?

(A) $100,000, representing the hotelier's lost profits.

A hotelier planning to build a new hotel estimated that first year profits would be about $10,000 per day. To encourage its contractor to work in a timely manner, the hotelier included in their contract a liquidated damages clause, providing that the contractor would be liable to pay the hotelier $100,000 per day for each day that the contractor is late in completion of the project. During the project, the contractor failed to place an order for the hotel's elevators in a timely manner. As a result of that oversight, the elevators were installed late and the hotel consequently opened 30 days later than scheduled. The hotelier sued the contractor for damages. At trial, an expert witness testified that the hotel would have received $300,000 in income during that 30-day period and would have expended $200,000, leaving a total profit of $100,000. How much should the contractor be required to pay to the hotelier in damages?

(A) The developer takes title subject to the prospector's leasehold interest and his option to purchase, because the prospector acquired his interest first.

A landowner owned a large tract of mineral-rich land in a sparsely populated area. He entered into a lease with a prospector who was interested in developing the land for mining. The term of the lease was two years and gave the prospector an option to buy the property at any time after the first year. The prospector did not record the lease. Six months later, the prospector left the land for a period of time to prospect in Mexico, leaving no goods on the land that would identify him. The landowner then conveyed the property in fee simple to a developer, who had inspected the property while the prospector was in Mexico and was unaware of the prior transaction. The developer did not immediately record her deed. After three months in Mexico, the prospector returned to the land and encountered the developer.A statute in the jurisdiction provides, in part: "No conveyance or mortgage of an interest in land, other than a lease for less than one year, is valid against any subsequent purchaser for value without notice thereof whose conveyance is first recorded."If the developer brings an action to quiet title, how should the court rule?

(D) The grandson has a possibility of reverter and the underprivileged youth club has nothing.

A landowner owned a parcel of land in the mountains. His will devised the parcel to "my nephew, his heirs and assigns, so long as it is used for camping and recreational purposes, otherwise to the underprivileged youth club." The residuary clause of his will left all his property not devised in the remainder of the will to his daughter, who was also his sole heir when he died. His daughter died intestate a few years later, leaving a son (the landowner's grandson) as her only heir.The jurisdiction's decisional law follows the common law Rule Against Perpetuities, and a statute provides that future estates and interests are alienable, and may be devised or inherited, all in the same manner as possessory estates or interests.Which of the following best describes the interests of the grandson and the underprivileged youth club in the parcel?

(D) The daughter's eldest daughter for life, remainder to the landowner's heirs.

A landowner provided in his will that his property would pass on his death to his son for life, "then to my eldest grandchild living at my son's death for life, remainder to my greatgrandchildren, share and share alike." When the landowner died, he was survived by his wife, his son, his son's son, his daughter, and his daughter's daughter. The son's son was the eldest of the two grandchildren. After the landowner's death, his son had another child, and his daughter had two more children. When the son died many years later, the son's eldest son had predeceased him, and seven great-grandchildren (of the landowner) had been born.At the son's death, in whom is title to the property vested?

(C) No, because the expense of fixing the oven provides a good faith reason for stopping production.

A pâté manufacturer entered into a written agreement with a gourmet food store. The manufacturer agreed to sell "all" its "output of liver pâté " to the store and the store agreed to sell the manufacturer's pâté "exclusively." The agreement between the store and the manufacturer also contained the statement, "either party may cancel this contract after two months on giving reasonable notice to the other party." After the manufacturer filled the store's orders for six months, the manufacturer determined that it was becoming too costly to operate and maintain the special oven used to roast the pâté loaves, and that it would be difficult and expensive to find a suitable substitute. The manufacturer, therefore, notified the store that it was getting out of the pâté business, and explained why, and that it would stop shipping pâté to the store after 60 days. The store sued the manufacturer, demanding that the manufacturer continue to ship pâté to the store or pay monetary damages.Will the store prevail?

(B) The real estate investor and the buyer.

A real estate investor purchased a home by taking out a $160,000 mortgage. After a few months, he sold the home to a buyer. According to the terms of the agreement signed by the parties, the buyer took the house "subject to the mortgage" and agreed to "assume payment of" the mortgage. A recession struck the area and the buyer found himself in financial difficulties. The buyer sold the home to a company that buys otherwise unsellable houses. Under the terms of the agreement signed by the parties, the company agreed to take "subject to the mortgage." All deeds and the mortgage were properly recorded. After two months, the company ceased making mortgage payments. The bank that held the mortgage unsuccessfully demanded payments from the company, the buyer, and the investor. The bank properly instituted proceedings to foreclose, and the house was put up for judicial sale. Because the recession had severely depressed property values, the house sold for only $120,000. After the $120,000 was applied to the mortgage, $37,800 was still owing on the principal amount.From whom can the bank seek judgment to cover the deficiency?

(A) Deny the motion, because the medical student was not a citizen of State B at the time the lawsuit was filed.

A resident of State A moved to State B to attend medical school. During her final year of medical school, the medical student was in a car accident with a classmate from State B. The classmate, however, waited until after graduation and after the medical student had moved to State C for her residency and permanent job to file suit in federal court in State B. The medical student filed a motion to dismiss for lack of diversity of citizenship.How should the court rule?

(B) $340, the contract price for the 40 suits, less the store's cover damages.

A retail store ordered 100 women's swimsuits at $10 each, as advertised in the catalog of a swimwear manufacturer. The manufacturer shipped 40 swimsuits to the store, along with a letter stating in relevant part: "We have shipped you 40 swimsuits at $10 each in response to your recent order. Please remit $400. Be informed that limited inventory will prevent us from being able to ship any additional suits at this time or at any time during this year's beach season." The store took the 40 suits and began to sell them. The store immediately sought an alternate supplier of swimsuits. The best price it could obtain was $11 per suit from a different company. The store ordered, received, accepted, and paid for 60 suits at $11 each from the other company. The store has refused to pay the manufacturer the $400, and the manufacturer has sued for payment.What is the manufacturer entitled to recover?

(C) The young woman honestly believed that the elixir would cure the blood disease, but her belief was unreasonable.

A scientist overheard from some friends that a young woman was suffering from a rare blood disease. The scientist told the young woman that he could cure her by giving her a special elixir he had invented. The scientist charged the young woman $500 for the elixir. The elixir had no effect on the blood disease. The scientist is charged with obtaining money by false pretenses.Which of the following, if true, would not absolve the scientist of guilt for obtaining money by false pretenses?

(B) The issue should be decided by the judge after hearing evidence from the corporation's attorney and the small business owner's attorney and may be conducted in the presence of the jury.

A small business owner filed a treble damages civil antitrust suit against a large corporation. While the corporation's director of marketing was on the stand, the corporation's attorney produced a "synopsis of sales," a document generated by the corporation's marketing division. In response to an objection by the small business owner's attorney that the record was hearsay, the corporation's attorney contended that the document is admissible as a business record. The small business owner's attorney argued that the document was actually a self-serving writing concocted for the litigation rather than made in the ordinary course of business, and demanded a hearing to determine whether this qualifies as a business record.Which of the following is the most appropriate way for the issue to be decided?

(C) No, because the general contractor never communicated an acceptance of the electrician's offer.

An electrician submitted a bid for electrical work in response to a newspaper ad placed by a general contractor, who was bidding on the renovation of an office building. The electrician's bid was the lowest and the general contractor used it to form his bid submitted to the owner of the building. The general contractor was awarded the contract, but later decided to hire another party, who had initially submitted a higher bid, to perform the electrical work.If the electrician sues for damages, will he prevail?

No, because the call revoked the offer

A software vendor who collected vintage baseball cards as a hobby had in his collection a Roger Maris baseball card, circa 1961, in pristine condition. The vendor knew that the local high school baseball coach would love to add that card to his own collection, so he told the coach that he was interested in selling it. The coach said that he would like to buy the card but did not have the kind of money on hand that he would need. He mentioned that he would, however, be getting a bonus in three weeks. The vendor replied that he could wait three weeks and proceeded to write the following on a piece of paper and hand it to the coach: "I will sell my 1961 Roger Maris baseball card to the coach for $2,000. This offer is good for the next 30 days." The vendor then signed the paper. The coach took the paper and went home. Two weeks later, before the coach could pay the $2,000 to the vendor, the vendor incurred an unexpected debt and gave the baseball card to his creditor as repayment of the debt. The vendor then called the coach to tell him that he was revoking his offer to sell the baseball card to the coach. The coach, who had cleared off his mantel and built a little wooden stand on which to display the card, filed suit against the vendor. Will the coach likely be successful?

(D) He has committed no crime.

A stagehand decided to play a practical joke on an actor. The stagehand went to the storage room where stage props were stored and took what he believed to be a stage gun from the locker where such guns were kept. In fact, a week before, an actress had put her real pistol in the stage gun locker and borrowed the stage gun for an amateur theatrical her church group was putting on.The actress had forgotten to remove the bullets that her husband always kept in the gun. The stagehand went into the actor's dressing room and yelled, "You've stolen the part that I always wanted to play, now die for it!" The actor knew that the stagehand liked to play practical jokes, and, after an initial frightened reaction, the actor broke out laughing. The stagehand laughed too, shouted, "Bang, you're dead!" and pulled the trigger. A bullet hit the actor in the heart, killing him.Which of the following best describes the stagehand's criminal liability?

(C) The plaintiff, because the law denies him the privileges and immunities of state citizenship.

A state legislature passed a law requiring all employers operating in the state's oil and natural gas fields to give preference in hiring to residents of that state. The bill banned the hiring of nonresidents unless no other qualified person could be found to fill an oilfield or natural gas field position. Under prevailing economic conditions, which included a substantial decline in petroleum prices, the statute was tantamount to a total ban on hiring of nonresidents because there were so many unemployed oil and gas workers and little new exploration was taking place.The plaintiff was an experienced oilfield worker who was denied a job in the state because his permanent residence was in another state, even though he had worked in many states and foreign countries and his qualifications were better than anyone else applying for the job. The sole reason given for not hiring the plaintiff was the preferential hiring statute favoring state residents. The plaintiff filed suit in federal district court challenging the statute.Who should prevail?

(B) Murder in the second degree.

A state statute defines all murders as second degree murders unless deliberation and premeditation can be shown, in which case the crime is elevated to first degree murder. Manslaughter is defined as at common law.The defendant wanted to steal some papers from a business associate's office, and so he arranged to have a meeting with her at her office. When the associate left the room, the defendant put a knockout drug in her coffee. After she passed out from drinking the coffee, the defendant rummaged through her files, finding and stealing the papers that he wanted. Unfortunately, the defendant miscalculated the dosage, and the business associate died.The crimes below are listed in descending order of seriousness.What is the most serious offense of which the defendant can be convicted?

(B) The creditor only, because the party holding the judgment lien has taken no action as of yet to enforce it.

A state statute provides as follows: Any judgment properly filed shall, for 10 years from the date of filing, be a lien on the real property then owned or subsequently acquired by any person against whom the judgment is rendered. A landowner conveyed a lot in that state to his aunt, who had had a judgment lien recorded against her two years earlier in the county in which the land was located. One year later, the aunt conveyed the property to a buyer by general warranty deed. The deed did not mention the lien, but the buyer was aware of it. Two years later, the buyer conveyed the property to a creditor by special warranty deed. The creditor was not aware of the lien and her deed also made no mention of it. One year after that transaction, the creditor conveyed the property to a developer by general warranty deed. The developer's deed did not mention the lien but the developer was aware of it. The next year, the developer entered into a contract to convey the property to an entrepreneur. The entrepreneur's title search disclosed the judgment lien against the aunt, and the entrepreneur refused to proceed with the transaction because title was not marketable. The developer brought an action against the entrepreneur for specific performance and was denied relief. He then brought an action against the aunt, the buyer, and the creditor for breach of warranty. Assuming that all transactions concerning the property were promptly and properly recorded, and that the party holding the judgment lien has taken no action as of yet to enforce it, which parties, if any, will be liable to the developer?

(C) The niece owns the property free of the bank's mortgage, because the buyer was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice.

A woman arranged with a bank to take out a loan for $30,000, secured with a mortgage on her home. On June 3, the woman executed the note and the mortgage, and the bank gave her a certified check for $30,000. On June 4, the woman sold her home to a wealthy buyer for $150,000 in cash. The buyer knew nothing about the mortgage. On June 5, the buyer recorded her deed to the property. Two hours after the buyer recorded, the woman fled the country.On the evening of June 8, which was a Saturday, the buyer presented her niece with a deed to the property as a gift. At 10 a.m. on June 10, the bank recorded its mortgage. At 2 p.m. on June 10, the niece recorded her deed. After the woman missed her first mortgage payment on July 1, the bank employees went to the title office. They discovered the deeds to the buyer and her niece. The bank demanded that the niece satisfy the $30,000 mortgage. The niece filed an appropriate suit to determine the various interests in the property.The recording statute in the jurisdiction reads, in relevant part: "A conveyance of an estate in land shall not be valid against any subsequent purchaser for value, without notice thereof, unless the conveyance is recorded."How should the court rule?

(B) The creditor only, because the party holding the judgment lien has taken no action as of yet to enforce it.

A state statute provides as follows:Any judgment properly filed shall, for 10 years from the date of filing, be a lien on the real property then owned or subsequently acquired by any person against whom the judgment is rendered.A landowner conveyed a lot in that state to his aunt, who had had a judgment lien recorded against her two years earlier in the county in which the land was located. One year later, the aunt conveyed the property to a buyer by general warranty deed. The deed did not mention the lien, but the buyer was aware of it. Two years later, the buyer conveyed the property to a creditor by special warranty deed. The creditor was not aware of the lien and her deed also made no mention of it. One year after that transaction, the creditor conveyed the property to a developer by general warranty deed. The developer's deed did not mention the lien but the developer was aware of it. The next year, the developer entered into a contract to convey the property to an entrepreneur. The entrepreneur's title search disclosed the judgment lien against the aunt, and the entrepreneur refused to proceed with the transaction because title was not marketable. The developer brought an action against the entrepreneur for specific performance and was denied relief. He then brought an action against the aunt, the buyer, and the creditor for breach of warranty.Assuming that all transactions concerning the property were promptly and properly recorded, and that the party holding the judgment lien has taken no action as of yet to enforce it, which parties, if any, will be liable to the developer?

(D) The director, unless he had reason to know that the boy had a propensity to commit violent acts.

A state statute provides that any teacher, guardian, therapist, school administrator, or any other person standing in loco parentis is subject to the same rights and duties as actual parents. No other statute is applicable to these facts. A residential institute for minors with mental or emotional disabilities had no fence surrounding its premises, but regular bedchecks were conducted each night to determine that all of the children were present. One night, a bedcheck determined that a 12-year-old resident of the institute was absent. The security guard who conducted the bedcheck immediately reported to the director of the institute that the boy was missing. The director initiated steps to find the boy but did not report the boy's absence to the police. Thirty-six hours after the boy ran away from the institute, he savagely beat and severely injured a six-year-old girl who lived a few blocks away from the institute. Her parents filed suit against the director on their daughter's behalf.Which party is likely to prevail in the lawsuit?

(D) No, because the father did not promise to send the money with the expectation of inducing the son to buy an engagement ring for his girlfriend.

A third-year college student telephoned his father and asked for $1,000 for living expenses. The father agreed to send him the money but told him that he needed to find a classier girlfriend or he would get no more money. The son thanked his father, and promptly went to a jeweler and selected an engagement ring for his girlfriend priced at $5,000. The son, who was 21 years of age, signed a contract to purchase the ring. The contract required the son to make a $1,000 down payment and then to make a series of installment payments. The son planned to use the $1,000 check he was expecting from his father for the down payment. The father discovered the son's plan to buy the engagement ring and refused to send the $1,000 check. The jeweler is now demanding that the son make the $1,000 down payment on the ring and pay the first installment as well.Can the son legally enforce his father's promise to send the $1,000?

(C) The ruling was defective because the jury's vote was not unanimous.

A transportation company from State A sued a tourism company from State B in federal court for breach of contract seeking $76,000 in damages. The transportation company filed an appropriate demand for a jury trial, and both parties stipulated that the jury would consist of 10 people. Following the trial and deliberations, nine of the jurors voted in favor of the plaintiff for $29,000 in damages, but one juror voted for the defendant. The defendant appealed.On which of the following grounds would the defendant most likely prevail on appeal?

(A) Deny the verdict, because the jury could find that the company failed to exercise reasonable care in making the dangerous condition safe.

A utility company working underground installed a guardrail around its access hole for safety. Although the guardrail completely surrounded the hole, there was an opening in one part of the rail to make it easier to pass down tools to those working below. The owner of a show dog living across the street from the utility access hole frequently walked his dog in his front yard without a leash. One afternoon, the dog unexpectedly chased a squirrel out of the dog owner's yard and ran through the opening of the guardrail, falling into the open hole and suffering broken bones and internal injuries. Although expert veterinary care saved the dog's life, the dog was no longer of "show quality" after the injuries.The dog owner brought a negligence claim against the utility company to recover his economic losses resulting from the injuries to his dog. At trial, the dog owner presented the above facts. The utility company presented uncontested evidence that the guardrail used by the company meets typical industry standards, and that the opening in the guardrail was not large enough for a person to have fallen through. At the close of the evidence, the utility company moved for a directed verdict.What should the court do?

(B) No, because the vintner's testimony is inadmissible hearsay.

A vintner whose winery building burned down sued a supply company, alleging that two large tanks that he had purchased from the supply company a month earlier had overheated and caused the fire. The supply company's defense is that the fire was caused by the vintner's failure to install modern electrical wiring in the rather old building.At trial, the vintner seeks to establish that the tanks overheated by testifying that, two weeks after the tanks were installed, a supply company employee came to inspect the installation, and the vintner said to him, "You know, sometimes these tanks get awful hot."Should the vintner be permitted to so testify?

(A) Murder of the husband and attempted murder of the friend.

A wife found some letters in her husband's dresser that disclosed that her husband was having an extended affair with her best friend. Furious, the wife purchased a handgun and waited for the right moment. At a barbecue celebrating her friend's birthday, the wife gave the gun to the friend's 10-year-old nephew. She told the nephew that it was a toy gun that would shoot out a Happy Birthday flag and that he should shoot his aunt with it as a joke. The nephew took the gun, pointed it at his aunt, and pulled the trigger. However, the nephew's aim was faulty, and when the gun discharged the bullet struck the husband, killing him.Which of the following best describes the crime or crimes of which the wife can be properly convicted?

(D) No, because she suffered no actionable harm.

A young boy was hospitalized after he accidentally swallowed a coin while playing. The boy recovered, but his mother began suffering feelings of anxiety, worrying that her child might be injured again. The mother went to a movie to relax and ordered some popcorn. While handling her change, the concession stand attendant carelessly dropped a quarter into the popcorn, which the mother did not notice until she bit the quarter. She did not swallow the quarter, nor did she bite on it hard enough to injure her teeth or gums, but the feel of the coin brought back all her anxieties about the boy's injury. The mother sued the movie theater for her emotional distress.If the jury finds that a reasonable person would not have suffered similar distress under the circumstances, is the mother likely to prevail?

(C) The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

An act of Congress provides for the payment of Social Security benefits to the disabled children of deceased workers. The benefits are payable even after the child reaches the age of majority, but terminate automatically if the recipient marries, unless the recipient marries a person who is also disabled, in which case the Social Security payments continue.The plaintiff has been disabled since birth, and her father died when she was 14 years of age. She has received Social Security benefits since her father's death. However, at age 25, the plaintiff married. Her husband is not disabled, and thus her Social Security benefits were summarily terminated. She files suit in federal district court, seeking to compel the government to restore her benefits. She asserts, among other things, that there is no logical reason why she should be deprived of benefits when unmarried disabled persons and disabled persons who marry other disabled persons continue to receive them.Which of the following provides the strongest constitutional basis for the plaintiff's suit?

(C) $3,000 to the bank and $15,000 to the credit union.

An entrepreneur purchased several acres of scrub-covered land of little apparent value. Shortly thereafter, an international conglomerate announced plans to develop a theme park on a tract immediately adjacent to the entrepreneur's scrubland. The plan caused real estate values in the surrounding area to skyrocket. Rather than resell his land for a substantial profit, the entrepreneur decided to build a variety of tourist-oriented facilities on the land. To finance his project, the entrepreneur obtained a loan from a bank in exchange for a $20,000 mortgage on his land. The bank promptly recorded the mortgage. A few days later, the entrepreneur went to a credit union and took out a $15,000 mortgage on the land. The credit union knew of the bank's mortgage, and the credit union promptly recorded its own mortgage. A few weeks after that, the entrepreneur went back to the bank and, after full disclosure of the credit union's mortgage, obtained another advance of $15,000 from the original bank mortgage, increasing the amount borrowed against the mortgage from $20,000 to $35,000. The bank promptly recorded the change. After spending much of these funds on retainers for architects, builders, and attorneys, the entrepreneur was upset to learn that the county council summarily rejected the theme park proposal. The entrepreneur made no more mortgage payments to the credit union, but continued to make payments to the bank. The credit union brought a foreclosure action against the entrepreneur and included the bank as a party. The value of the land in the area had plummeted, so the proceeds at the foreclosure sale were just $18,000 after attorneys' fees and court costs.How should the proceeds be divided?

(B) Attempted receipt of stolen property, because his mistaken belief that the goods were stolen is no defense to attempt.

In order to track down "fences" and other distributors of stolen goods, police officers, with permission of the owners and insurers, forwarded stolen jewelry they have intercepted on the way to the defendant, a reputed fence. The defendant took the jewelry, which he believed to be stolen.What crime has the defendant committed?

(C) No, because the brother's tax evasion shows a tendency to lie.

The defendant was being sued by the plaintiff for driving his car negligently and injuring the plaintiff. The defendant called as a witness his brother, who was in the passenger seat of the defendant's car when the accident occurred. His brother testified that the defendant was driving safely and well below the posted 55-mile-perhour speed limit. Shortly before the trial began, the brother's secretary telephoned the plaintiff and told him that the brother has been understating his income to the government for years. The Internal Revenue Service has never charged the brother with tax evasion, but the secretary's information was accurate. On cross-examination, the plaintiff's attorney asked the brother, "Have you ever cheated on your tax returns?" The defendant's attorney objects.Should the objection be sustained?

(B) Yes, as evidence that the victim was in the defendant's company that night.

The defendant was on trial for statutory rape. He denied that the alleged victim was even in his presence on the night of the alleged offense, when he was working as the night clerk at a convenience store. The prosecution offers to have a witness testify that, in a phone conversation on the evening in question, the victim, who is available to testify at the trial, said that she had to leave because the defendant wanted her to stop by the store while he was working. The defense objects to the proposed testimony.Should the court allow the witness's testimony?

(B) The plaintiffs and other residents of the large town have been denied equal protection of the law.

Citizen groups proposed the merger of a large town of 60,000 residents with an adjacent small town of 30,000. To allay fears of residents of the small town that control of the government would be in the hands of the more populous town, the proposal would establish three council districts of 20,000 persons each in the large town and three districts of 10,000 persons each in the small town for a period of 20 years. Each district would elect one representative to the six-person town council, and the mayor would be elected at large. The proposal carried by large majorities in both towns, and representatives from both towns proceeded to carve each former city into three council electoral districts. Three taxpayers from the large town filed suit to enjoin the holding of an election with council districts of such disparate proportions.Which of the following represents the plaintiffs' best constitutional argument?

(B) Yes, because regulation of state and local employees is within the ambit of federal power over interstate commerce.

Congress passed a statute requiring that all full-time employees, including state and municipal employees, be paid overtime for any work over 40 hours per week, or be otherwise compensated through time off or vacation time. A small town located in a very warm climate employs only three refuse collectors and cannot afford to hire more. During the warmest times of the year, extra refuse collections are routine because of the fear that rotting garbage in the hot climate could contribute to the spread of disease. During the hottest months, the three refuse collectors in the town regularly worked well beyond the 40 hours per week standard. Because of normal vacation time and the normally heavy garbage collection schedule, it would not be possible to give the refuse collectors additional time off during the cooler months without hiring additional refuse collectors. The town brings an action in federal district court, asserting that the federal statute requiring overtime pay for municipal workers is unconstitutional.Should the court find that the statute is constitutional?

(A) No, because the testimony shows that the defendant is a person of good character.

The defendant was on trial on a hit and run charge, whereby the prosecution asserted that the defendant's vehicle struck and injured an elderly pedestrian, and then the defendant sped away from the scene of the accident without stopping to assess the pedestrian's injuries or to render assistance. The defendant took the stand and denied the charge. A priest is ready to testify that he has known the defendant for 12 years, and that the defendant is a highly responsible person who would not run away from his obligations by leaving the scene of an accident.If the prosecution objects to the priest's proposed testimony, should the court bar the priest from testifying?

(C) $30,000, because the defendant was 30% at fault.

During a personal injury case, the jury determined that the plaintiff was 30% at fault for his own injuries, the defendant was 30% at fault, and a third party was 40% at fault. The jury further found that the plaintiff suffered $100,000 worth of damages. The jurisdiction has a partial comparative negligence statute that bars a plaintiff's recovery if his fault was greater than that of the defendant, and has abolished joint and several liability.How much can the plaintiff collect from the defendant?

(D) No, because the requirements of the exception to the hearsay rule for former testimony have been satisfied.

Defendant was put on trial for robbery and aggravated battery. Despite having been seriously injured in the attack, the victim took the witness stand and identified the defendant as his attacker. The first trial ended in a hung jury on both charges, and the victim died shortly thereafter from his injuries. The district attorney then charged the defendant with felony murder. At the trial on that charge, the prosecution offers into evidence the victim's testimony at the first trial identifying the defendant as his assailant. The defendant's attorney immediately objects.Should the objection be sustained?

(A) Yes, because the leasing company's failure to reject the advertising agency's offer within a reasonable time constituted an acceptance under the circumstances.

For a number of years, a leasing company has been in charge of leasing the luxury skyboxes at a local basketball stadium. During this time, it annually sent area businesses personalized "invitations" to lease skyboxes for the season. The invitations, which were always sent out several months before each season began, contained detailed price terms and language stating that the deadline for responding was 10 weeks before the start of the season and that all leases were subject to the approval of the management of the leasing company. A local advertising agency had always responded to their invitation immediately by registered mail because they found it very worthwhile to lease a skybox to entertain their clients. During the five years that they had responded affirmatively to the invitation, they never received any additional communications from the leasing company regarding approval, but the tickets and an invoice would arrive about a week before the season began.Several months before the current season, the advertising agency received and immediately responded to its invitation. Two weeks before the season began, a stunning trade brought the league's most popular star to the city's basketball team, prompting a dramatic increase in the demand for tickets. A few days later, the advertising agency, which had already scheduled in a number of clients to attend games in its skybox, received a notice from the leasing company stating that management had not approved the agency's lease of the skybox for this season. In a separate announcement to all area businesses, the leasing company announced that all available skyboxes would be leased for three- or five-year terms, and that an auction of the leases would be conducted if the demand exceeded the supply. The advertising agency decided that it was not financially feasible to co

(B) The buyer, because destruction of the dictionary avoids the contract and discharges her duty to pay.

On April 1, a graduate student who owned an antique dictionary agreed to sell it to a buyer for $1,500. The written contract between the seller and the buyer provided that the dictionary would not be delivered to the buyer until April 20. Late on April 15, a fire swept through the seller's apartment building, through no fault of the seller, and the dictionary was destroyed. Fortunately for the seller, he had insurance that covered all of his damages, including compensation for the destroyed dictionary. On April 20, the seller told the buyer of the fire, but still demanded payment, claiming that the buyer was the equitable owner of the dictionary when it was destroyed, and told her that she could have obtained insurance on the dictionary had she wanted to, because she had an insurable interest in the dictionary as soon as the contract was made. The buyer refused to pay. The seller brings an action against the buyer for the $1,500.Who will prevail?

No contract between the realtor and the developer arose on September 2.

On August 1, a realtor mailed a written offer to a developer for the sale of a large tract of land. The offer included the following terms: This offer expires on September 1, if the offeree has not caused an acceptance to be received by the offeror on or before that date. Early on September 1, the developer sent a written acceptance by messenger but the messenger company negligently withheld delivery to the realtor until September 2. On September 4, the realtor entered into a contract for sale of the tract to another buyer but did not inform the developer of the transaction. When the developer contacted the realtor a few days later, the realtor said there was no contract between them. What is the most accurate statement regarding the relationship between the parties?

(A) Yes, because it is a statement by an opposing party.

On an icy day, a vehicle driven by the defendant struck the plaintiff's car in the rear, smashing a taillight and denting the plaintiff's bumper. Before the plaintiff could say anything, the defendant rushed out of his car and told the plaintiff, "Look, if you'll take $500 for the damage, I'm sure my insurance company will pay for it." The plaintiff refused and sued the defendant for damage to his car and minor personal injuries. The plaintiff wishes to testify as to the defendant's statement at the time of the accident. The defendant objects.Should the court allow the defendant's statement to be admitted?

(B) The lumberjack may compel the buyer to allow him to use the easement, because nonuse of an easement does not constitute abandonment.

Seventeen years ago, a lumberjack purchased Lot 1, which is adjacent to Lot 2 and Lot 3. A public road runs along the far side of Lots 2 and 3. At the time of the purchase, he asked the owner of Lot 2 to grant him an easement to use the paved way across Lot 2 to haul logs to the public road. The owner of Lot 2 agreed. The lumberjack paid nothing for the easement, and the deed granting the easement was properly recorded. For six months, the lumberjack hauled logs across Lot 2. The lumberjack then negotiated with the owner of Lot 3, and she granted him a license to haul logs on the gravel road across Lot 3 to the public road, a shorter distance than the route across Lot 2. The lumberjack paid the owner of Lot 3 a modest annual fee for this privilege. Since that time, the lumberjack has never used the paved way across Lot 2 for any purpose. Six months ago, the owner of Lot 2 conveyed the lot to a buyer, and two weeks ago, the buyer had a chain-link fence built around the perimeter of Lot 2, which blocked the lumberjack's access to the paved way crossing Lot 2. One week ago, acting within her rights, the owner of Lot 3 revoked the lumberjack's license to use the gravel road crossing Lot 3. The next day, the lumberjack demanded that the buyer of Lot 2 remove the chain-link fence because of the easement, but the buyer refused. The state has a 15-year prescription and adverse possession period.Which of the following best represents the lumberjack's rights under the circumstances?

(B) $600, because the borrower's moral obligation to pay the lender $1,000 became the consideration for the borrower's agreement to pay the lender $600.

Several years ago, a lender lent a borrower $1,000, and the parties agreed in writing that the borrower would repay the lender within one year. The borrower failed to repay the lender, but the lender took no action prior to the expiration of the five-year statute of limitations on suits for debt. Some time after that, the lender phoned the borrower and told him, "If you'll pay me $600 now, I'll forget all about that unpaid $1,000 debt." The borrower agreed orally and then sent the lender a signed letter, which stated, "I, the borrower, agree to pay the lender $600." The borrower never paid the lender the $600 and the lender sued the borrower shortly thereafter.What is the lender entitled to recover?

(C) The state must show that favoring mothers over fathers is substantially related to an important governmental interest.

State legislation established family counseling centers throughout the state targeting poor single-parent households, which were typically headed by a woman. Accordingly, the legislation provided that all counseling would be free for single mothers with an income of less than $20,000 per year. Others would have to pay fees for the counseling on a sliding scale depending on income. A single father raising two children on an income of approximately $7,000 per year objected to paying the sliding scale fee. A public interest law firm files suit in federal court on his behalf, alleging discrimination.Which of the following statements is most accurate?

(D) The dismissal of the case in municipal court was based on a technicality that did not go to the merits of the case.

The defendant was arrested and charged with possession of illegal narcotics and placed on trial in a municipal court. The defendant demanded a jury trial, which was duly granted. After the jury had been sworn, selected, and impaneled, the defendant's attorney filed a motion with the presiding judge praying for a dismissal based on a technical error in the bill of information drawn up by the city prosecutor. No witnesses had yet been sworn at the time the attorney filed the motion. The judge ordered an immediate recess while he considered the motion. Two days later he ruled in favor of the defendant and dismissed the charges against him.A week later a state grand jury indicted the defendant for possession of illegal narcotics with intention to distribute same. The charges arose out of the same incident and arrest described above. The defendant was ordered to appear in the superior court of the state to answer the charges. The defendant's attorney immediately filed a motion on the defendant's behalf asserting that it would be unconstitutional to retry the defendant in the state court.The best argument against granting the motion is which of the following?

(B) Yes, as a statement made to treat a physical condition.

The defendant is being sued under a federal statute that allows an action for damages by victims of domestic violence committed on military bases or other federal land. The lawsuit stems from the alleged longtime physical abuse of the eight-year-old daughter of the defendant's live-in girlfriend.At trial in federal court, the plaintiff, the girl's legal guardian, calls as a witness the physician who treated the girl for her injuries. The plaintiff seeks to have the doctor testify that, during his treatment of the girl, he told her that in order to treat her injuries properly, he needed to know how she received her injuries and the length of time that her condition had existed. The doctor will testify that the girl told him that the defendant had beaten her, and that the beatings had taken place fairly regularly for several months.Is the doctor's testimony admissible?

(C) The equitable mortgage doctrine.

The fee simple owner of an unimproved parcel of wooded land orally agreed to sell it to a buyer under an installment land contract. The buyer agreed to pay $5,000 down and $100 a month for the next 10 years, and the owner would retain the deed until the buyer finished paying the installments.After making the down payment, the buyer moved onto the property and began clearing some of the trees for a road and a cabin. He regularly made the payments for several months but then was killed by a falling tree. His properly executed will conveyed his real estate to a friend and the remainder of his estate, consisting of personal property and $200,000 in cash, to his son. During the next several months, his estate failed to make payments on the installment contract. The owner then notified the estate that he was rescinding the deal and asserting ownership of the parcel, and offered to return the amount the buyer had paid him, less expenses, as restitution.The buyer's estate initiated a quiet title action, naming the owner, the friend, and the son as parties. The estate's filings indicated that it was prepared to complete the conveyance and redeem the land by paying the accelerated full balance of the contract from the proceeds of the estate. The friend believes he should receive title to the parcel free of any obligation on the installment contract.Which of the following doctrines is inapplicable?

(B) Yes, because the owner and the corporation's president entered into a valid oral contract.

The owner of a gourmet food store entered into oral negotiations with the president of a food products corporation to secure an exclusive distributorship in the state for a popular truffle sauce. After some discussion, the parties agreed on all salient points and shook hands on the deal. They agreed further that the corporation's general counsel would reduce the agreement to writing and that the agreement would become effective after it was drawn up and initialed by the corporation's general counsel and by the store owner's attorney. The corporation's general counsel duly committed the agreement to writing and sent the writing to the store owner's attorney, but without initialing it first. The attorney looked over the agreement, made no changes, initialed it, and mailed the agreement to the corporation's counsel on May 1. On May 2, the president of the corporation decided that a large national grocery chain would be a better distributor for the sauce than the gourmet food store, so he had the general counsel call the store's attorney to say that the deal was off. The corporation's counsel received the written agreement with the attorney's initials on it on May 3. Nevertheless, the corporation began to distribute its products through the national grocery chain.If the gourmet food store owner files suit against the corporation and its president for breach, is she likely to prevail?

Yes, because the owner signed the land sale contract.

The owner of a house put the property up for sale. A surgeon entered into negotiations with the owner to purchase the house, and the parties agreed upon a sale price of $200,000 and a closing date. The owner told the surgeon that she would drop a contract in the mail and have her attorney draw up a deed. The owner signed a land sale contract, which included the property's address but did not contain a metes and bounds legal description. She mailed the contract to the surgeon that afternoon, although it was mailed too late for the last mail pickup of the day. The owner's attorney promptly drew up a deed and dropped it in the mail to his client. The surgeon received the contract the next day. After she mailed the contract, the owner received an offer of $250,000 for her property from her next-door neighbor, who wanted to expand beyond his own property line. The owner called her attorney and told him to inform the surgeon that the deal was off. The attorney e-mailed the surgeon, stating that his client had found another purchaser for the property, and that all matters regarding the surgeon's offer for the property were rescinded. The surgeon signed the contract anyway and returned it to the homeowner by registered mail. If the surgeon brings an action to compel the owner to convey the property to him for $200,000, is he likely to prevail?

(D) No, because the fleet owner's exclusive use of the mechanic's repair shop was a condition for the mechanic's duty to purchase ads through the wife, and the fleet owner's actions excused the mechanic's duty to the wife.

The owner of a large fleet of buses contracted in writing with a mechanic that all general maintenance and extraordinary repairs required for the buses would be performed by the mechanic. The fleet owner's wife owned and operated a small advertising agency. The fleet owner included a clause in the agreement that the mechanic would place all his ads for his repair shop through the wife's agency during the one-year term of the agreement. For six months, the mechanic dutifully placed all his ads through the wife's agency and informed her of his agreement with the fleet owner. During that time, the wife turned down work from two prospective clients because of the time that she would have to devote to designing and disseminating ads from the mechanic. The mechanic then discovered that the fleet owner was having some of his buses repaired and maintained by other shops. The mechanic immediately ceased placing ads through the wife and employed another agency.Can the wife successfully bring suit against the mechanic to enforce the agreement?

(A) Nothing, because the birds did not arrive at the shop owner's store by May 21.

The owner of a pet shop received an e-mail from a professional bird breeder that included the following offer: "Lovebirds! $120 a pair! Delivery in 4-6 weeks. Terms of sale, cash within 30 days of delivery." The shop owner e-mailed the bird breeder on April 26, agreeing to purchase one pair of lovebirds for $120. After looking over the e-mail the next day, the bird breeder sent a reply e-mail to the shop owner indicating that there was a mistake in the initial e-mail; it should have read "$120 per bird." The bird breeder went on to state that she would ship the pair of birds to the shop owner if she would pay the additional $120. In her e-mailed reply, the shop owner authorized the breeder to ship the pair of lovebirds and agreed to pay the additional $120, but she noted that they must be delivered on or before May 21. The bird breeder immediately e-mailed the shop owner agreeing to deliver the birds to her by May 21. However, the birds did not arrive at her shop until June 1, and the shop owner refused to accept them. In an action by the bird breeder against the shop owner for breach of contract, which of the following awards is most likely?

(A) Yes, he may evict the successor and collect damages from the tenant because nonassignment clauses are valid and enforceable.

The owner of a shopping center entered into a two-year lease with a tenant who was opening a greeting card shop. When the lease still had 14 months left to run, the tenant decided to sell his business and inventory to a successor. When the tenant told the mall owner that he planned to assign his lease to the successor, the mall owner objected, citing a clause in the lease requiring consent to any assignment and providing that any attempted assignment without consent is grounds for terminating the lease. The tenant assigned the lease to the successor anyway. The successor operated the card store in the same manner as the tenant, the only difference being a change of the store's name.Does the mall owner have any recourse against the tenant or the successor?

(C) Yes, because the manufacturer's April 2 letter was sufficient to bind the store owner.

The owner of a sporting goods store noticed that her tent stock was running low. After consulting various manufacturers' catalogs, she decided to order from a large manufacturer of camping equipment whose catalog listed the 9 x 12 tent that she wanted at a cost of $70 per tent. On April 1, the store owner phoned the manufacturer and placed her order for 10 tents with the manufacturer's sales agent. The next day, the manufacturer mailed the store owner a signed letter stating that there was a contract for sale for 10 tents at $70 per tent plus a $40 shipping fee, and that the tents would be shipped on April 16. The store owner received the letter on April 4, but she never responded. On April 15, she received a catalog from another tent company showing tents similar to the ones that she ordered, but for a cost of only $60. The store owner immediately called the manufacturer with whom she had placed her order to cancel it. Nevertheless, the manufacturer shipped the tents to her on April 16.If the manufacturer sues the store owner to enforce the contract, is the manufacturer likely to prevail?

(C) No, because the testimony is improper character evidence.

The plaintiff sued the defendant for bodily injuries suffered by the plaintiff as a result of a collision between the cars they were driving. The accident occurred on a rainy day, when the defendant's car skidded across the center line and struck the plaintiff's car. A principal issue is whether the defendant was driving too fast for the wet conditions. At trial, the plaintiff calls a witness who is prepared to testify that he has lived next door to the defendant for 15 years, and that the defendant is notorious in the neighborhood for driving his car at excessive rates of speed. The defendant's attorney objects.May the witness's testimony be allowed?

(A) Yes, but only to challenge the credibility of the bystander's earlier inconsistent statement.

The plaintiff sued the defendant for injuries suffered when the defendant's car struck the plaintiff as she was crossing a busy intersection. The plaintiff planned to have a bystander who had witnessed the accident testify on her behalf, but he died prior to trial. At trial, the plaintiff called the wife of the bystander to testify that, although she had been facing the other way, she had heard her husband exclaim, "My God, the woman was crossing on the green light!" Over objection, the statement was admitted as an excited utterance. The defendant now wishes to call the bystander's friend, who is prepared to testify that, a few hours after the accident, the bystander said to him: "You know that accident I saw this afternoon? The driver didn't run a red light. The light was yellow."Should the friend's testimony be admitted over the plaintiff's objection?

(B) The construction workers responsible for blocking off the exit ramp were employees of an independent contractor rather than the city.

The plaintiff was exiting from a parking garage owned and operated by the city when he discovered that the exit ramp was blocked by construction barricades and a pile of broken-up concrete. No workers or detour signs were around and the plaintiff was in a hurry, so he backed up and drove down an entrance ramp that was clearly marked as such. As he came around a corner, his car was broadsided by a pickup truck. The plaintiff was seriously injured in the collision. A statute in the jurisdiction requires drivers to obey all traffic directional markings in both public and private parking lots and garages. The jurisdiction retains governmental immunity for municipalities.If the plaintiff brings a lawsuit against the city to recover for his injuries, which of the following facts will be LEAST helpful in the city's defense?

(A) For the boy, because the store owner violated the statute when she sold the glue to the boy.

To fight drug abuse, a state enacted a statute forbidding the selling of model airplane glue to anyone under the age of 18 except in small quantities in prepackaged model kits. Violation of the statute was penalized by fines or, in cases of multiple violations, possible imprisonment. The statute also required that all elementary and secondary schools licensed by the state provide comprehensive drug education programs. Neither the legislature nor the courts of the state have abolished the common law tort defense of assumption of the risk.The owner of a hobby shop in the state sold a large tube of airplane glue to a 15-year-old boy who reasonably appeared to be at least 18 years old. The boy had received drug education in his school, as mandated by the statute, including coverage of the dangers of glue sniffing. The boy understood the anti-drug instruction, but he wanted to experience it for himself. The boy sniffed the glue repeatedly and suffered permanent brain damage.If the boy's parents file suit on the boy's behalf against the store owner, for whom is the court likely to rule?

(D) No, because there was no constitutional violation here.

Under a state aid-to-education statute, one private school receives: (i) free textbooks from the state, (ii) an exemption from state taxes, and (iii) 20% of its operating budget in the form of state grants. The remaining 80% of the school's budget is covered by tuition fees and by donations from alumni and others. The school is licensed by the state, but the state has no requirement for certification and licensure of teachers in private schools.A teacher was hired and given the school's standard three-year contract. In the fall term of his second year, the teacher gave a lecture to his students criticizing the school's use of school uniforms and encouraging the students to organize a protest against the uniform policy. After the speech, the teacher was called to the administrative office by the headmaster and fired on the spot, despite the teacher's protests that he had almost two years left on his contract. The teacher requested a hearing and was told to leave the premises of the school immediately. The teacher files suit in federal district court, alleging that his constitutional rights have been violated.Is the teacher likely to succeed?