TEST

Duration: 6 hours
Total Marks: 30 Marks
Total Number of questions: 4

Instructions to Candidates:
a. Please read the questions carefully and answer only to what has been asked.
b. Please adhere to the prescribed word limits.
c. Please point out the exact sub section, clause or sub clause which forms the basis of
your answer.
d. Please use official sources for statutes, regulations, and case laws and provide web-
links for these to substantiate your responses unless instructed otherwise.
e. Please write the answers in your own words. Plagiarism is strictly prohibited. Any
verbatim copy pasted response to a question will not be evaluated. However, the
candidate is allowed to acknowledge and use important quotations within double
quotation marks, if required, for furnishing an accurate response.

SECTION I: US LEGAL RESEARCH: 5 MARKS

QUESTION 1: (Word Limit 300)

How do you prove fault in accidents on dangerous or defective property in
California?

QUESTION 2: (Word Limit 300)

What is the procedure for naming "Estate" as Defendant in Texas? Can we
name the Personal Representative or the Estate itself as the Defendant?

SECTION II: ANALYTICAL REASONING: 20 Marks

QUESTION 3: (Word Limit 500)

Defendant ‘John Doe’ owned, operated, managed, supervised, controlled, maintained,
inspected, cleaned and/or monitored the Premises located at Los Angeles, California.
Decedent ‘ABC’ and husband “XYZ” lived in Apartment 1 of the Premises and were tenants
at the Premises since approximately 2004. On or about 12/07/2019, Decedent waited outside
of the Premises for her transportation service to go to the doctor. It drizzled during the early
morning. Her transportation did not show up. On her way back into her apartment, the wet
walkway caused Decedent to slip and fall. Decedent’s ankle wedged underneath the gated
door of the Premises resulting in fracture of her ankle, Decedent was transported to the
hospital on 12/07/2019 where she had a surgery. The day after surgery, she woke up, and
then suddenly passed away.
Plaintiffs are informed and believe that Defendants knew, or should have known, the
following conditions existed at the Premises, knew, or should have known, that the conditions
constituted unreasonable hazards to its residents, including Decedent, and knew, or should
have known, that the conditions highly likely would cause residents, including Decedent and
guests to suffer serious injury or death as follows:
(a) There was an extremely slippery floor condition at the Premises that created an
unreasonable risk of the harm to its residents, including Decedent, and guests.
(b) The anti-slip grip tapes on the walkway were not properly spaced and maintained
in that the grip tapes were spaced more than 10 inches apart and were in
frayed/tattered condition at the time of the incident. Further, the anti-slip grip tapes
were not properly installed, thereby making the surface slippery and creating a very
dangerous condition, especially when the floor is wet.
(c) The floor of the common areas of the Premises is tile and prone to water logging.
Defendants took no measures to clean the accumulated water on the surface, thereby
making the surface slippery and creating a very dangerous condition.
(c) The floor of the common areas of the Premises is tile and prone to water logging.
Defendants took no measures to clean the accumulated water on the surface, thereby
making the surface slippery and creating a very dangerous condition.

Do you think ‘Willful Misconduct’ Cause of Action is applicable in this case? Please cite
reasons in support of your point.

QUESTION 4: (Word Limit 500)

ABC and XYZ are business associates. ABC lives in Phoenix, AZ, and XYZ lives in
San Francisco, CA. They have been friends since childhood when they went to school
together in Phoenix. While XYZ moved to California, he kept in touch with ABC, who
remained in Phoenix and became a computer programmer. Last year, ABC and XYZ agreed,
by exchange of emails, that XYZ would pay ABC $20,000 and ABC would write some
software for XYZ’s new website. Three months ago, however, XYZ told ABC that he was
unhappy with his work and was terminating this relationship after XYZ had been paid only
$4,000 but had completed most of the project. ABC was incensed and threatened that if XYZ
did not pay him the balance, he would sue. He flew out to San Francisco on May 10 of this
past year to confront XYZ. He rented a Ford Fusion and drove to XYZ’s house. XYZ invited
him in to discuss the matter. Soon, the discussion got heated and XYZ insisted that ABC
leave the house. ABC failed to do so and starting screaming that XYZ was a “rotten, no-good
back-stabber.” XYZ punched ABC in the nose and then ran to the kitchen and grabbed a
steak knife. He ran up to ABC, brandished the knife and said “Get out of my house! NOW!”
ABC left the house, but tripped on some loose gravel on the front porch and fell. ABC then
got up and screamed, “You haven’t seen the last of me, you jerk!” XYZ replied, “Oh, yeah.
Here’s something to remember me by” and threw a stone from the front doorway that
shattered the window of ABC’s rental car. ABC drove to the hospital where he was
diagnosed with a broken nose from the punch and a severely sprained ankle from the fall. He
incurred hospital bills of $15,000 and had to miss work for several days. ABC now wants to
sue XYZ for everything plausible.

Please state the legal theories (causes of action) and facts supporting your contention in
order to file this civil lawsuit.