3L PRETEST QUESTIONS

EXAM CODE 1046

Copyright © 2019 by BARBRI, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording,
or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Printed in the United States of America.
 3L Pretest Questions 1.

3L Pretest Questions

Question 1 Question 2

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.
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?
(A) A neighbor’s testimony that the witness has
beaten his wife on several occasions.
(B) A police officer’s testimony that the defen-
dant has a general reputation in the commu-
nity as a violent person.
(C) A neighbor’s testimony that the defendant
has a reputation for being untruthful.

Can the son legally enforce his father’s (D) Evidence that the defendant has a convic-
promise to send the $1,000? tion for aggravated battery.

(A) Yes, because the son relied on his father’s

promise and the doctrine of promissory
estoppel applies.

(B) Yes, because the son was an intended

beneficiary.

(C) No, because the father’s promise to pay for

his son’s expenses was not in writing.

(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.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

2. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 3
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?
(A) The mother was negligent in supervising
her son.
(B) The mother was not planning on making
any purchases.
(C) The criminal’s act was a superseding force.
(D) The son was not a customer of the mall.
Question 4
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 inter-
ests 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?
(A) The niece owns the property subject to the
bank’s mortgage, because the niece is a
donee.
(B) The niece owns the property subject to
the bank’s mortgage, because the bank
recorded before the niece.
(C) The niece owns the property free of the
bank’s mortgage, because the buyer was
a bona fide purchaser for value without
notice.
(D) The niece owns the property free of the
bank’s mortgage, because the bank does not
qualify as a bona fide purchaser for value.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

Question 5
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 victim’s testimony was
from a prosecution for a different offense
than the present trial.
(B) Yes, because the use of the former testi-
mony of someone who has died violates the
defendant’s constitutional right to confront
the witnesses against him in a criminal
case.
(C) No, because the victim’s testimony is
nonhearsay under the Federal Rules as a
statement of prior identification.
(D) No, because the requirements of the excep-
tion to the hearsay rule for former testi-
mony have been satisfied.
3L Pretest Questions 3.
Question 6
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 owner-
ship 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 install-
ment contract.
Which of the following doctrines is inappli-
cable?
(A) The doctrine of equitable conversion.
(B) The doctrine of part performance.
(C) The equitable mortgage doctrine.
(D) The doctrine of exoneration.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
4. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 7
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 state-
ment to be admitted?
(A) Yes, because it is a statement by an oppos-
ing party.
(B) Yes, because it is hearsay within the state-
ment against interest exception.
(C) No, because the statement took the form of
a settlement negotiation.
(D) No, because the statement is hearsay not
within any exception.
Question 8
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 devel-
oper 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?
(A) The developer takes title subject to the
prospector’s leasehold interest and his op-
tion to purchase, because the prospector
acquired his interest first.
(B) The developer takes title subject to the
prospector’s leasehold interest but not his
option to purchase, because he does not yet
have the power to exercise the option.
(C) The developer takes title subject to the
prospector’s leasehold interest and option
to purchase regardless of whether she now
records, because she will have had notice of
the prospector’s interest before recording.
(D) The developer takes title free of the
prospector’s leasehold interest and option,
because the prospector failed to record
before the developer purchased the property
without notice of his interest.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

Question 9
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 great-
grandchildren, share and share alike.” When the
landowner died, he was survived by his wife, his
son, his son’s son, his daughter, and his daugh-
ter’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?
(A) The landowner’s heirs.
(B) The grandchildren living at the landowner’s
death.
(C) The daughter’s eldest daughter for life,
remainder to the great-grandchildren.
(D) The daughter’s eldest daughter for life,
remainder to the landowner’s heirs.
3L Pretest Questions 5.
Question 10
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 prece-
dent 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?
(A) The son loses, because the son is attempt-
ing a retaliatory eviction.
(B) The son loses, because the classmate is the
father’s tenant and not the son’s.
(C) The son wins, because he has a fee simple
subject to divestment.
(D) The son wins, because the father’s convey-
ance cuts off the classmate’s tenancy.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
6. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 11
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?
(A) Deny the verdict, because the jury could
find that the company failed to exercise
reasonable care in making the dangerous
condition safe.
(B) Grant the verdict, because the guardrail
used by the company meets typical industry
standards.
(C) Grant the verdict, because the owner’s
negligence claim does not support recovery
of solely economic loss.
(D) Grant the verdict, because a reasonably
careful person would not have been injured
in the same manner.
Question 12
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 physi-
cian 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?
(A) No, because the auto accident would not
have occurred but for the negligence of the
emergency room doctor.
(B) No, because the employee did not intend to
harm the co-worker.
(C) No, because the automobile accident was
not reasonably foreseeable.
(D) Yes, because the employee intended that her
co-worker should ingest the drug.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
 3L Pretest Questions 7.

Question 13 Which of the following best represents the

lumberjack’s rights under the circumstances?
Seventeen years ago, a lumberjack purchased
Lot 1, which is adjacent to Lot 2 and Lot 3. A (A) The lumberjack may use the paved way
public road runs along the far side of Lots 2 across Lot 2, because the revocation of his
and 3. At the time of the purchase, he asked the license to use the gravel road crossing Lot
owner of Lot 2 to grant him an easement to use 3 means that he has an easement by neces-
the paved way across Lot 2 to haul logs to the sity to cross Lot 2.
public road. The owner of Lot 2 agreed. The
lumberjack paid nothing for the easement, and (B) The lumberjack may compel the buyer to
the deed granting the easement was properly allow him to use the easement, because
recorded. For six months, the lumberjack hauled nonuse of an easement does not constitute
logs across Lot 2. The lumberjack then negoti- abandonment.
ated with the owner of Lot 3, and she granted
him a license to haul logs on the gravel road (C) The lumberjack has no right to use
across Lot 3 to the public road, a shorter distance the easement across Lot 2, because he
than the route across Lot 2. The lumberjack paid abandoned the easement.
the owner of Lot 3 a modest annual fee for this
privilege. Since that time, the lumberjack has (D) The lumberjack has no right to use the
never used the paved way across Lot 2 for any easement across Lot 2, because the
purpose. Six months ago, the owner of Lot 2 easement reverted to the owners of Lot 2 by
conveyed the lot to a buyer, and two weeks ago, prescription.
the buyer had a chain-link fence built around the
perimeter of Lot 2, which blocked the lumber-
jack’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.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

8. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 14
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?
(A) Deny the electrical company’s motion and
grant the homeowner’s motion for a di-
rected verdict, because a short in the wiring
caused the homeowner’s injuries.
(B) Deny the electrical company’s motion
and grant the homeowner’s motion for a
directed verdict, because the company
failed to rebut the presumption of negli-
gence that the homeowner has established.
(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.
(D) Deny both directed verdict motions,
because the homeowner has presented
enough evidence to submit the case to the
jury.
Question 15
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?
(A) $1,000, because the agreement by the bor-
rower to pay the lender $600 revived the
original $1,000 obligation.
(B) $600, because the borrower’s moral obliga-
tion to pay the lender $1,000 became the
consideration for the borrower’s agreement
to pay the lender $600.
(C) Nothing, because the statute of limitations
has run.
(D) Nothing, because no additional consider-
ation was provided to support the borrow-
er’s agreement to pay the lender $600.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

Question 16
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 defen-
dant had beaten her, and that the beatings had
taken place fairly regularly for several months.
Is the doctor’s testimony admissible?
(A) Yes, provided that the girl or her legal
guardian has waived the physician-patient
privilege.
(B) Yes, as a statement made to treat a physical
condition.
(C) No, because the girl’s statement is not
limited to a description of symptoms, but
also includes a statement that the defendant
caused her injuries.
(D) No, unless the girl is too young to testify or
is otherwise unavailable.
3L Pretest Questions 9.
Question 17
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 difficul-
ties. 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 insti-
tuted proceedings to foreclose, and the house
was put up for judicial sale. Because the reces-
sion 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) The real estate investor only.
(B) The real estate investor and the buyer.
(C) The buyer and the company.
(D) The real estate investor, the buyer and the
company.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
10. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 18
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 whole-
saler 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 whole-
saler. A week later, the manufacturer had sent no
additional communication to the wholesaler.
What is the relationship between the parties?
(A) There is no contract between the manu-
facturer and the wholesaler, because the
wholesaler made a material alteration.
(B) There is a valid, enforceable contract
between the manufacturer and the whole-
saler, but it is limited to the terms of the
manufacturer’s offer.
(C) There is a valid, enforceable contract
between the manufacturer and the whole-
saler, and it contains the additional term
because the manufacturer raised no objec-
tion.
(D) The wholesaler has sent a valid counteroffer
to the manufacturer, which the manufac-
turer can accept or reject.
Question 19
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 neigh-
borhood for driving his car at excessive rates of
speed. The defendant’s attorney objects.
May the witness’s testimony be allowed?
(A) Yes, because the defendant’s character as a
careless driver is in issue.
(B) Yes, because character may be proven by
reputation evidence.
(C) No, because the testimony is improper
character evidence.
(D) No, because the testimony is hearsay, not
within any exception.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
 3L Pretest Questions 11.

Question 20 Assuming that all transactions concerning the

property were promptly and properly recorded,
A state statute provides as follows: and that the party holding the judgment lien has
taken no action as of yet to enforce it, which
Any judgment properly filed shall, for parties, if any, will be liable to the developer?
10 years from the date of filing, be a
lien on the real property then owned (A) No one, because the developer had actual
or subsequently acquired by any knowledge of the lien when he purchased
person against whom the judgment is the property.
rendered.
(B) The creditor only, because the party holding
A landowner conveyed a lot in that state to the judgment lien has taken no action as of
his aunt, who had had a judgment lien recorded yet to enforce it.
against her two years earlier in the county in
which the land was located. One year later, the (C) The creditor and the aunt, because the
aunt conveyed the property to a buyer by general buyer conveyed by special warranty deed.
warranty deed. The deed did not mention the
lien, but the buyer was aware of it. Two years (D) The buyer and the aunt, because they
later, the buyer conveyed the property to a were aware of the judgment lien but did
creditor by special warranty deed. The creditor not mention it in their deeds, but not the
was not aware of the lien and her deed also made creditor, because she was not aware of the
no mention of it. One year after that transaction, lien.
the creditor conveyed the property to a devel-
oper 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 market-
able. 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.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

12. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 21
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) No, unless there has been no other evidence
about overheating of the tanks presented by
the vintner.
(B) No, because the vintner’s testimony is
inadmissible hearsay.
(C) Yes, because the vintner’s testimony is
evidence of a fact in issue.
(D) Yes, because the vintner’s testimony is
evidence of a verbal act.
Question 22
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?
(A) Yes, but only to challenge the credibility of
the bystander’s earlier inconsistent state-
ment.
(B) Yes, both for impeachment purposes and as
substantive evidence.
(C) No, because the bystander is not available
to explain or deny the statement.
(D) No, because it is hearsay, not within any
recognized exception to the hearsay rule.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

Question 23
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 obliga-
tions 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?
(A) No, because the testimony shows that the
defendant is a person of good character.
(B) No, because the testimony is habit evidence
tending to show that it was unlikely that the
defendant was the perpetrator.
(C) Yes, because one may not use character
evidence to bolster one’s own testimony.
(D) Yes, because the prosecution has not made
an issue of the defendant’s character.
3L Pretest Questions 13.
Question 24
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?
(A) The buyer, because the seller was fully
compensated for his dictionary and mak-
ing the buyer pay would therefore result in
unjust enrichment.
(B) The buyer, because destruction of the
dictionary avoids the contract and
discharges her duty to pay.
(C) The seller, because when he contracted with
the buyer, the risk of loss passed to her.
(D) The seller, because of the doctrine of
equitable conversion.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
14. 3L Pretest Questions

Question 25 Is the advertising agency correct in its asser-

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.
tions?
(A) Yes, because the leasing company’s fail-
ure to reject the advertising agency’s offer
within a reasonable time constituted an
acceptance under the circumstances.
(B) Yes, because the leasing company’s “invita-
tion” to the advertising agency was an offer,
which the agency accepted.
(C) No, because the leasing company was
entitled to reject the agency’s offer when it
did.
(D) No, but the advertising agency would be
able to recover reliance damages from the
leasing company under a quasi-contract
theory.

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 basket-
ball team, prompting a dramatic increase in the
demand for tickets. A few days later, the adver-
tising 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 commit itself to anything
longer than a one-year lease. It sent a letter to
the leasing company, stating that a contract was
created between the parties and that the leasing
company will be in breach if it does not perform.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

 3L Pretest Questions 15.

Question 26 Question 27

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 agree-
ment 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 discov-
ered 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) Yes, because she partially performed by
placing ads for the mechanic during the
first six months of the agreement.
During a personal injury case, the jury deter-
mined 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 plain-
tiff’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?
(A) $100,000, because the partial comparative
negligence statute does not bar his recov-
ery.
(B) $70,000, because the plaintiff was 30% at
fault.
(C) $30,000, because the defendant was 30% at
fault.
(D) Nothing, because the defendant was no
more at fault than the plaintiff.

(B) Yes, because she detrimentally relied on the

mechanic’s promise to place ads when she
refused other clients.

(C) No, because the wife provided no consid-

eration for the agreement between the fleet
owner and the mechanic.

(D) No, because the fleet owner’s exclusive use

of the mechanic’s repair shop was a condi-
tion 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.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

16. 3L Pretest Questions

Question 28 Question 29

An entrepreneur purchased several acres The defendant was on trial for statutory rape.
of scrub-covered land of little apparent value. He denied that the alleged victim was even in
Shortly thereafter, an international conglomerate his presence on the night of the alleged offense,
announced plans to develop a theme park on a when he was working as the night clerk at a
tract immediately adjacent to the entrepreneur’s convenience store. The prosecution offers to
scrubland. The plan caused real estate values have a witness testify that, in a phone conversa-
in the surrounding area to skyrocket. Rather tion on the evening in question, the victim, who
than resell his land for a substantial profit, the is available to testify at the trial, said that she
entrepreneur decided to build a variety of tourist- had to leave because the defendant wanted her
oriented facilities on the land. To finance his to stop by the store while he was working. The
project, the entrepreneur obtained a loan from a defense objects to the proposed testimony.
bank in exchange for a $20,000 mortgage on his
land. The bank promptly recorded the mortgage. Should the court allow the witness’s testi-
A few days later, the entrepreneur went to a mony?
credit union and took out a $15,000 mortgage
on the land. The credit union knew of the bank’s (A) Yes, as a present sense impression of the
mortgage, and the credit union promptly recorded victim’s.
its own mortgage. A few weeks after that, the
entrepreneur went back to the bank and, after (B) Yes, as evidence that the victim was in the
full disclosure of the credit union’s mortgage, defendant’s company that night.
obtained another advance of $15,000 from the
original bank mortgage, increasing the amount (C) No, because the victim is available as a
borrowed against the mortgage from $20,000 to witness.
$35,000. The bank promptly recorded the change.
After spending much of these funds on retainers (D) No, because the victim’s state of mind is
for architects, builders, and attorneys, the entre- not in issue.
preneur 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?
(A) $18,000 to the bank and nothing to the
credit union.
(B) $9,000 to the bank and $9,000 to the credit
union.
(C) $3,000 to the bank and $15,000 to the
credit union.
(D) Nothing to the bank, $15,000 to the credit
union, and $3,000 to the entrepreneur.

GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE


Question 30
A general contractor advertised in a trade
publication that she planned to bid on the
construction of a new building. The advertise-
ment 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?
(A) $10,000.
(B) $2,000, which represents the difference
between the plumber’s bid and the amount
she had to pay for the plumbing work.
(C) Nothing, because $12,000 was a reasonable
amount to pay for the work performed.
(D) Nothing, because the general contractor did
not accept the plumber’s bid before it was
withdrawn.
3L Pretest Questions 17.
Question 31
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-per-
hour speed limit. Shortly before the trial began,
the brother’s secretary telephoned the plaintiff
and told him that the brother has been under-
stating 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?
(A) Yes, because the question is not relevant to
the facts of the case at bar.
(B) Yes, because witnesses may not be
impeached through the use of collateral
material.
(C) No, because the brother’s tax evasion shows
a tendency to lie.
(D) No, because the brother’s acts constitute
a felony punishable by at least one year in
prison.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
18. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 32
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 manufac-
turer 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 expen-
sive to find a suitable substitute. The manufac-
turer, 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 manufac-
turer, demanding that the manufacturer continue
to ship pâté to the store or pay monetary
damages.
Will the store prevail?
(A) Yes, because it was not impossible for the
manufacturer to perform.
(B) Yes, because the manufacturer assumed the
risk that making pâté would become expen-
sive.
(C) No, because the expense of fixing the oven
provides a good faith reason for stopping
production.
(D) No, because the cancellation provision
made the contract illusory.
Question 33
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?
(A) Yes, he may evict the successor and collect
damages from the tenant because nonas-
signment clauses are valid and enforceable.
(B) No, the nonassignment clause is invalid in
this case because the owner has a duty to
mitigate damages.
(C) No, because the successor is operating the
same type of business as the tenant, and the
owner has suffered no damages resulting
from the assignment.
(D) No, because nonassignment clauses are
invalid restraints upon alienation.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

Question 34
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?
(A) Yes, because the concession stand attendant
was negligent.
(B) Yes, because she suffered emotional
distress.
(C) No, because a reasonable person would not
have suffered similar distress under the
circumstances.
(D) No, because she suffered no actionable
harm.
3L Pretest Questions 19.
Question 35
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 perma-
nent 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?
(A) For the boy, because the store owner vio-
lated the statute when she sold the glue to
the boy.
(B) For the store owner, because the boy is not
a member of the class of persons meant to
be protected by the statute.
(C) For the store owner, because the boy was
aware of the danger when he sniffed the
glue.
(D) For the store owner, because the boy could
reasonably have been mistaken for an
18-year-old by the store owner.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
20. 3L Pretest Questions
Question 36
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?
(A) The girl, unless a 12-year-old would not be
liable for administering the beating.
(B) The girl, because the director assumed the
role of a parent and liability is, therefore,
imposed under the in loco parentis statute.
(C) The director, because he cannot be
found vicariously liable for the boy’s acts
inasmuch as parents are not vicariously
liable at common law for the torts of their
children.
(D) The director, unless he had reason to know
that the boy had a propensity to commit
violent acts.
Question 37
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) The plaintiff was aware that another exit on
the other side of the garage was open.
(B) The construction workers responsible for
blocking off the exit ramp were employees
of an independent contractor rather than the
city.
(C) The city does not collect fees or make a
profit in the operation of the garage.
(D) The pickup truck driver could have avoided
the plaintiff but recognized him as an old
enemy and deliberately ran into him.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE

Question 38
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?
(A) Yes, because there was an implied accep-
tance that the general contractor would use
the lowest bid for electrical contracting.
(B) Yes, because the electrician’s bid was
an offer for an option contract that was
accepted on acceptance of the general
contract.
(C) No, because the general contractor never
communicated an acceptance of the electri-
cian’s offer.
(D) No, because the general contractor’s adver-
tisement for bids did not constitute an offer.
3L Pretest Questions 21.
Question 39
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?
(A) The child will win, because a ride operator
failed to use reasonable care in securing the
seatbelt.
(B) The child will win, because operators of
the ride did not discover the ride’s defect
through a reasonable inspection.
(C) The amusement park will win, because the
child cannot specifically identify which
employee was negligent.
(D) The amusement park will win, because the
child’s injury was caused by a defect that
was present in the ride at the time of its
purchase from the manufacturer.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
22. 3L Pretest Questions

Question 40

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?

(A) $400, the contract price for the 40 suits

delivered by the manufacturer and accepted
by the store.

(B) $340, the contract price for the 40 suits, less

the store’s cover damages.

(C) The fair market value of the 40 suits, less

the $60 cover damages.

(D) Nothing, because it failed to fully perform

the contract.

STOP