Reference no: EM131623190

1. Champ was already intoxicated when he entered Bill's Tavern. At first, Bill refused to serve him any more alcohol. Champ insisted, however, and at his insistence, Bill served him three more drinks. When Champ left the bar he was unable to start his car. He asked Helper, who was driving by, to assist him. Helper, who realized that Champ was drunk, determined that Champ's battery was weak, and started Champ's car by connecting a cable to her own battery. Later, while driving, Champ struck Ped, who was walking across the street. Ped asserted a claim for his personal injuries against Helper. Which one of the following facts or inferences, if it was the only one true, would provide Helper with the most effective defense?

A. The state had a statute making a barkeeper liable for damage done by a person who purchased alcohol from the barkeeper after already being intoxicated.

B. Helper was in the business of rendering road service to motorists having trouble with their cars.

C. Champ drove 200 miles before striking Ped.

D.Champ would not have struck Ped if he had not been intoxicated.

2. Dan was driving down Main Street at an unreasonable fast rate of speed when, as a result, he collided with Barker's car which was standing unattended against the curb. The impact caused a loaded rifle, which Barker had left in the back seat of the car to fire. The bullet went through the car window and traveled four blocks before striking Skippy, who was leaving the Rainbow paint factory after work. Although Skippy had lost the sight in his left eye in an accident, which occurred when he was a child, he was employed by the Rainbow Paint Company as a color coordinator. As a result of his being struck by the bullet from Barker's rifle, Skippy lost the sight in his right eye. This rendered him totally blind, causing him to lose his job. Skippy subsequently asserted a negligence claim against Dan, alleging permanent loss of earning capacity in addition to other items of damage.

Which of the following is Dan's most effective argument in defense against Skippy's claim for permanent loss of earning capacity?

A. Skippy was a super-sensitive plaintiff, since he was already blind in one eye.

B. Barker acted unreasonably by leaving a loaded rifle in the back seat of his car.

C. Skippy was outside the foreseeable zone of danger.

D. The reasonable person would not have expected that Dan's conduct would cause any person to be rendered blind.

3. Thug broke into Grower's Grocery store in the middle of the night. After stealing all the money that was in the cash register, she blew open the door of the safe with nitroglycerin and stole its contents as well. Then, as she was leaving, she stole a six-pack of Three Star Beer. Because of poor quality control at the Three Star brewery where it was made, the beer contained a toxic ingredient. Later that night, Thug drank three cans of the beer and was made seriously ill by the toxic ingredient, which it contained. In an action by Thug against Three Star, the court will most likely find for

A. Thug, if her injury was proximately caused by the negligence of Three Star.

B. Thug, since Three Star breached an express warranty.

C. Three Star, since Thug does not come into court with "clean hands".

D. Three Star, if Thug's theft of the beer is regarded as unforeseeable.

4. Starr Studios was filming part of a motion picture at a large residential apartment building with the permission of the building owner. To avoid interference by curious onlookers, Starr's security agents set up a command post in the lobby of the building. No persons were allowed to enter the building without identifying themselves and explaining their reasons for being there. Raz, who lived in an apartment in the building, was returning from a fishing trip late one night. Unaware of Starr's activities, he was stopped by Starr employees as he attempted to enter. Because he was not carrying identification, Raz was unable to establish his identity. For this reason, the employees refused to allow him to enter. After trying unsuccessfully to convince them that he lived there, Raz stayed with his sister who lived a block away. The following morning, he contacted the building owner who spoke to Starr officials and arranged to have them allow Raz to enter. If Raz asserts a claim against Starr for false imprisonment, which of the following would be Starr's most effective argument in defense?

A. Starr employees did not know that Raz was entitled to enter the building.

B. The conduct of Starr employees was not unreasonable.

C. Raz was not imprisoned.

D. Raz sustained no damage as a result of the conduct of Starr employees.

5. Prescott, who owned an appliance repair shop, was at a cocktail party when he saw Dresden, one of his competitors. Approaching Dresden, Prescott said, "I'm glad to run into you. I was hoping that we could discuss the possibility of going into partnership instead of competing with each other." Dresden responded, "I wouldn't go into business with you because you're the most incompetent person I've ever known." Audit, a customer of Prescott's, overheard the conversation. As a result, the following day, Audit cancelled a contract, which he had with Prescott. If Prescott asserts a claim against Dresden for defamation, Prescott will be successful if

A. Dresden knew or should have known that the statement was defamatory when he made it.

B. Dresden knew or should have known that the statement was false when he made it.

C. Dresden knew or should have known that the statement would be overheard when he made it.

D. Dresden knew or should have known that harm would result from the statement.

Contracts

1. Otto's hobby was restoring and collecting antique automobiles. After acquiring a 1919 Bensonhurst Bullet automobile, she contacted Cal's custom Body Shop about having the car repainted. Cal said that he would paint the Bullet for $700, and would sell Otto a new bumper for an additional $150. Using an order blank from a pad, which he purchased, at a stationery store, Cal wrote out all the terms of their agreement. On a printed line marked, "PAYMENT" he wrote, "Paint job--$700, payable $300 in advance and $400 on completion. Bumper--$150 payable on delivery." Both Cal and Otto signed at the bottom of the form.

Which of the following statements most correctly describes the obligations set forth in the writing signed by Otto and Cal?

A. Payment by Otto of the initial $300 is a condition precedent to Cal's obligation to paint the car, and Cal's painting of the car is a condition precedent to Otto's obligation to pay the additional $400.

B. Payment by Otto of the initial $300 is a condition precedent in form and substance to Cal's obligation to paint the car, and Cal's painting of the car is a condition precedent in form, but subsequent in substance to Otto's obligation to pay the additional $400.

C. Payment by Otto and painting of the car by Cal are concurrent conditions.

D. Neither party's obligation to perform is conditioned upon performance by the other party.

2. When Austin's uncle died, he left her a ten-story office building, which had a motion picture theater on its ground floor. The offices in the building were all occupied when Austin acquired title to it. The motion picture theater was vacant, however, so she advertised for a tenant. Martin had researched the neighborhood and decided that it was a good location for a pornographic movie theater. When he saw Austin's advertisement, he contacted her and said that he was interested in leasing the theater. He did not tell her what type of films he intended to show because he thought that she might be unwilling to rent it to him for that purpose. On April 1, they entered into a written rental agreement for the theater, occupancy to begin on May 1. On April 15, the city council passed an ordinance prohibiting the showing of pornographic films in the neighborhood where the theater was located. As a result, Martin advised Austin that he was canceling the rental agreement.

If Austin sues Martin for breach of contract, the court should find for

A. Martin, under the doctrine of frustration of purpose.

B. Martin, under the doctrine of impossibility of performance.

C . Martin, because after the contract had been formed, government action made its subject matter unlawful.

D. Austin.

3. On March 12, Homer hired Contractor to construct a three-car garage on Homer's realty. After negotiation, they entered into a valid written contract, which fixed the price at $8,000. According to the terms of the contract, Homer was to pay $4,000 when the work was half completed on or before April 25, and to pay the balance upon completion. All work was to be completed by June. On April 10, when the work was one quarter complete, the partial structure was totally destroyed in a fire, which started without fault, by either party. The damage done by the fire made it impossible to complete construction on time. Because he was committed to begin construction on a hotel on June 1, Contractor notified Homer on April 12 that he would perform no further work for Homer. Homer subsequently hired Toil, another contractor, to build the garage at a price of $9,000. Assume for the purpose of this question only that Homer instituted an action against Contractor for damages resulting from breach of contract, and that Contractor asserted a defense based on impossibility of performance. The court should find for

A. Contractor, because the fire was not his fault.

B. Contractor, because he has not yet received any compensation from Homer.

C. Homer, because the work was only one-quarter complete when fire destroyed the structure.

D. Homer, because Contractor's obligation was to work for Homer until June 1.

4. Cole was the owner of a condominium, which consisted of an apartment with a patio and a small backyard. When he moved in, he entered into a written contract with Lance. Pursuant to its terms, Lance was to perform certain specified gardening services in the yard of Cole's condominium each week for a period of one year, for which Cole was to pay the sum of $50 per month. The contract contained a clause, which stated, "Cole hereby agrees not to assign this contract without the written permission of Lance." Three months after entering into the agreement, Cole informed Lance that he was selling the condominium to Anne, and asked Lance to consent to Cole's assignment of the contract to Anne. Because the costs of landscaping materials had increased dramatically in the last three months, Lance was glad for an opportunity to be relieved of his obligations under the contract, and refused to consent to the assignment. Cole assigned the contract to Anne anyway, but Lance refused to perform any further work on the yard. After formally demanding performance from Lance, Anne hired another gardener to do the same work for $75 per month, which was the best price Anne could negotiate.

In an action by Anne against Lance for breach of contract, the court should find for

A. Anne, because Lance had no right to unreasonably withhold consent to the assignment.

B. Anne, because the assignment was valid in spite of Lance's refusal to consent.

C. Lance, because the contract prohibited assignment by Cole without Lance's consent.

D. Lance, because the contract was for personal services.

5. On June 1, after arson fires had damaged several city buildings, the City Council of the city of Romo voted to offer a reward to aid in apprehension of the arsonists. On June 2, by order of the City Council, signs were posted in various locations throughout the city. The posters identified the building which had been burned, and stated: "$1,000 REWARD is hereby offered by the City of Romo to any person furnishing information leading to the conviction of persons responsible for setting fire to said buildings." Robert, a police officer employed by the City of Romo saw the posters on June 5, and resolved to make a special effort to catch the arsonists. Although he was not officially assigned to the case, he notified his fellow police officers and his usual underworld informants that he was especially interested in the case. As a result, Marino, a police officer, and Stu, an underworld informant, passed information to Robert, which they thought, might relate to the arson crimes. The tip, which Robert received from Marino, proved to be of no assistance, but that which he received from Stu led him to conduct a further investigation. His efforts eventually resulted in the arrest of two men who pleaded guilty to setting fires in public buildings. Robert demanded that the City Council pay him $1,000 but the council refused.

If Robert institutes a lawsuit against the City of Romo for the $1,000 reward offered in the signs posted on June 2, which of the following would be the City's most effective argument in defense?

A. The reward should go to Stu, since it was his information, which eventually led to the arrest of the arsonists.

B. The reward was not accepted, since the arsonists were not convicted but pleaded guilty.

C. Robert gave no consideration for the City's promise to pay a reward, since he was already obligated to attempt the apprehension of the arsonists.

D. There was no enforceable promise by the City, since the offer was for a gratuitous cash award.

Criminal Law

1. Julie had lost her job and needed to make some money quickly. While visiting a local tavern, she ran into Charlie, an old friend. When Julie told Charlie about her financial problems, Charlie pointed to an expensive-looking coat, which was hanging on a coat rack and said, "Why don't you steal that coat. It looks like you should be able to sell it for at least one hundred dollars." Because Julie said she was afraid the owner of the coat would see her, Charlie agreed to sing in a loud voice to create a diversion so that Julie could steal the coat while everyone was watching Charlie. As soon as Charlie began to sing, Julie took the coat from the coat rack and ran from the tavern. In fact, the coat actually belonged to Charlie, who had been joking when he told Julie to steal it.

Of which of the following crimes may Julie be properly convicted?

A. Larceny only.

B. Conspiracy only.

C. Larceny and conspiracy.

D. Neither larceny nor conspiracy.

2. Dick knew his neighbor Vic had a weak heart and that Vic had suffered several heart attacks in the past. Because he was angry at Vic, Dick decided to try to frighten him into another heart attack. He watched Vic's house and when he saw Vic leaving through the front door, he ran towards him shouting, "Look out. Look out. The sky is falling." Although Dick was not sure that this would kill Vic, he hoped it would. When Vic saw Dick running toward him, shouting, he became frightened, and had a heart attack and died on the spot.

The jurisdiction has statutes, which define first-degree murder as "the deliberate and premeditated killing of a human being," and second-degree murder as "any unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought, except for a killing which constitutes first degree murder." In addition, its statutes adopt common law definitions of involuntary manslaughter.

Which of the following is the most serious crime of which Dick can properly be convicted?

A. First-degree murder.

B. Second-degree murder.

C. Voluntary manslaughter.

D. Involuntary manslaughter.

Questions 3-4 are based on the following fact situation.

One day when Edward's parents were away, Edward, Fanny, and Jerry, who were students at the same high school, cut classes to go to Edward's home and listen to records. Edward was 17 years of age; Fanny and Jerry were each 15. Edward and Fanny knew that Jerry was very shy. Since Fanny had engaged in sexual relations with several other boys at the high school, she and Edward secretly agreed that Fanny would try to seduce Jerry. Fanny had some marijuana in her purse, and she and Jerry smoked some of it. When Jerry was high, Fanny undressed him and attempted to have sexual intercourse with him. Although at first Jerry was unwilling to have intercourse while Edward was in the room, Fanny gave him more marijuana to smoke until he became so intoxicated that he was willing to try. By then, however, his intoxication made him physically unable to perform. Instead, Fanny had intercourse with Edward while Jerry watched. Jerry knew the ages of Edward and Fanny. Jerry knew that it was unlawful to have intercourse with a female under the age of 16. Edward believed that it was lawful to have intercourse with a female over the age of 14.

A statute in the jurisdiction provides that "A person is guilty of rape in the third degree when, being seventeen years of age or more, he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a person under the age of sixteen years."

3. If Fanny is charged with attempting to commit rape in the third degree as a result of her attempt to have intercourse with Jerry, she should be found

A. Guilty, because she overcame his resistance by the use of an intoxicating substance and would have completed the act of intercourse but for Jerry's physical inability to perform.

B. Guilty because Jerry was under the legal age of consent.

C. Not guilty, because Fanny was under the age of 18.

D. Not guilty because Fanny was a female.

4. Assume that the laws in state define a conspiracy as "An agreement to commit a crime between two or more persons with the specific intent to commit a crime." If Edward is charged with conspiracy based on his agreement with Fanny regarding the seduction of Jerry, Edward's most effective argument in defense would be that

A. The seduction of Jerry would not have been possible without Fanny's participation.

B. Edward did not commit any overt act, which was likely to accomplish the seduction of Jerry.

C. Fanny was unsuccessful in having intercourse with Jerry.

D. Intercourse between Fanny and Jerry would not have been a crime.

5. Vena was addicted to heroin, and frequently committed acts of prostitution to obtain the money she needed to buy drugs. One night she was out looking for customers for prostitution when she was approached by Dorian who asked what her price was. When she told him that she would have intercourse with him for $20, he said that he would get the money from a friend and see her later. When Vena went home several hours later, Dorian was waiting inside her apartment. He said that he wanted to have sex with her, but when Vena repeated her demand for $20, he said that he had no money. She told him to get out or she would call the police. Dorian took a knife from his pocket, saying that if she did not have intercourse with him he would kill her. Silently, Vena took off her clothes and had intercourse with him.

Immediately afterwards, Dorian fell asleep. Vena tied his hands and feet to the four corners of the bed, and woke him. She said, "Now you are going to be punished for what you have done. I should kill you, but I wont' because I want to make sure that you suffer for the rest of your life." Using his own knife, she began to cut and jab at him with it, planning to torture but not to kill him. She stabbed and blinded him in both eyes, then cut off his sex organs. She also severed the tip of his nose and made a series of cuts across his face and chest. If Dorian is charged with rape, the court should find him

A. Guilty, because he overcame Vena's refusal to have intercourse with him by threatening to kill her with his knife.

B. Not guilty, because Vena's demand for twenty dollars.

C. Not guilty, because Vena offered no resistance and Dorian did not use physical force.

D. Not guilty, because of the injuries inflicted by Vena.