Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

CA Bar Outlined and Numbered (with prompts) > MBE Review > Flashcards

MBE Review Flashcards

1
Q

T

EXPERT’S OPINIONS MAY BE BASED ON FACTS

A
  1. LEARNED BEFORE THE TRIAL
  2. LEARNED AT THE TRIAL
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

3

FACTORS FOR EVALUATING THE PREDOMINATE PURPOSE RULE ARE

A
  1. LANGUAGE OF CONTRACT
  2. NATURE OF SUPPLIER’S BUSINESS
  3. RELATIVE VALUE OF GOODS VS. SERVICES
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

1

QUANTUM MERUIT IS THIS TYPE OF CONTRACT

A
  1. IMPLIED-IN-FACT
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

4

MEANS OF REVOKING OFFER

A
  1. LAPSE
  2. DEATH BY OFFEROR
  3. REVOCATION BY OFFEROR
  4. REJECTION BY OFFEREE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

2

INDIRECT REVOCATION OCCURS WHEN

A
  1. OFFEROR ACTS IN AN WAY INCONSITENT WITH INTENTION TO MAINTAIN OFFER
  2. OFFEREE LEARNS ABOVE ACTION FROM RELIABLE SOURCE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

2

OPTION CONTRACT

A
  1. OFFEREE AGREES TO KEEP OFFER OPEN FOR AGREED UPON PERIOD OF TIME
  2. IN EXCHANGE FOR CONSIDERATION FROM OFFEREE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

T

MAJORITY RULE - WHERE CONTRACTOR USES SUB-CONTRACTOR’S BIDS TO MAKE HIS OWN BID, WHAT MAY CONTRACTOR USE TO ENFORCE SUB-CONTRACTOR’S BIDS?

A

PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

3

ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACT OFFER BY SILENCE CAN OCCUR WHERE

A
  1. IMPLIED IN FACT
  2. PRIOR DEALINGS CREATE REASON FOR OFFERREE TO NOTIFY OFERROR HE DOES NOT INTENT TO ACCEPT
  3. OFFEREE GIVES OFFEROR CLEAR REASON TO EXPECT SILENCE WILL CONSTITUTE ACCEPTANCE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

6

UCC TERMS MATERIALLY ALTERING CONTRACT

A
  1. WARRANTY DISCLAIMERS
  2. CHANGE TO PRICE, QUALITY, QUANTITY
  3. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
  4. CLAUSES CHANGING INDUSTRY STANDARDS
  5. CLAUSES CHANGING STANDARDS OF PRIOR DEALINGS
  6. ATTORNEY’S FEES PROVISIONS
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

4

EXCEPTIONS TO THE PREEXISTING DUTY RULE

A
  1. CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES
  2. RATIFY VOIDABLE OBLIGATION
  3. HONESTY DISPUTE OF DUTY
  4. DUTY IS TO THIRD PARTY
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

1

UNDER THE UCC, CONDITIONED ACCEPTANCE IS NOT

A
  1. ACCEPTANCE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

T

IMPLIED IN FACT CONTRACTS ARE TYPICALLY CREATED BY

A

CONDUCT

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

2

PERFECT TENDER RULE - A SHIPMENT OF NON-CONFORMING GOODS WILL ALLOW SELLER TO

A
  1. ACCEPT NON-CONFORMING GOODS
  2. REJECT NON-CONFORMING GOODS
  3. CEASE PERFORMANCE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

1

REMEDY OF NON-BREACHING LOST VOLUME SELLER

A
  1. DEMAND THE EXPECTED PROFIT OF THE CONTRACT
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

5

UCC 2-706 - NON-BREACHING SELLER’S REMEDY IN RECEIPT REJECTED BUT CONFORMING GOODS

A
  1. SELL THE GOODS AT A PRIVATE OR PUBLIC SALVAGE SALE
  2. AFTER NOTICE TO BREACHING BUYER
  3. DEMAND EXCESS OF CONTRACT PRICE OVER SALVAGE SALE PRICE
  4. PLUS INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
  5. MINUS EXPENSES SAVED FROM BREACH
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

1

UCC 2-508 BREACHING SELLER’S RIGHT TO CURE - BREACHING SELLER HAS RIGHT ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO CURE WITHIN CONTRACT PERIOD IF

A
  1. NOTICE IS GIVEN OF INTENT TO CURE
17
Q

2

UCC 2-508 - BREACHING SELLER WHO HAS SHIPPED NON-CONFORMING GOODS HAS EXTRA REASONABLE PERIOD TO CURE WHERE

A
  1. NOTICE IS GIVEN OF INTENT TO CURE
  2. NON-CONFORMING GOODS ARE SHIPPED WITH REASONABLE BELIEF OF THEIR CONFORMITY
18
Q

3

UCC 2-104 - MERCHANT

A
  1. A PERSON DEALING WITH GOODS OF THE KIND
  2. OR HAS KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL PECULIAR TO THE PRACTICES OR GOODS INVOLVED IN THE CONTRACT
  3. OR EMPLOYS ONE WITH SUCH KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL
19
Q

2

UCC STATUTE OF FRAUDS - IF BOTH PARTIES ARE MERCHANTS, THE WRITING REQUIREMENT MAY BE SATISFIED BY

A
  1. SALES CONFIRMATION LISTING QUANTITY
  2. NOT OBJECTED TO WITHIN 10 DAYS
20
Q

2

UCC 2-704 NON-BREACHING SELLER’S RIGHT TO COMPLETE GOODS INTENDED FOR BREACHING BUYER

A
  1. SELLER MAY FINISH GOODS IF REASONABLY BELIEVES CAN SELL TO ANOTHER BUYER
  2. OR SCRAP EFFORTS AND CEASE PRODUCTION
21
Q

1

UCC 2-704 NONBREACHING BUYER’S CHOICE TO CONTINUE PRODUCTION FOR BREACHED CONTRACT IS BASED ON

A
  1. REASONABLE BUSINESS PERSON STANDARD
22
Q

3

UCC - TO PROVE HE IS LOST VOLUME SELLER, SELLER MUST SHOW

A
  1. HE MAKES HIGH VOLUME OF SIMILAR GOODS
  2. HE HAS MULTIPLE BUYERS
  3. VOLUME SALES BREAK EVEN OR MAKE A PROFIT
23
Q

1

WHERE SELLER MAKES MORE MONEY IN RESALE OF WRONGFULLY REJECTED CONFORMING GOODS, PROFIT BELONGS TO

A
  1. SELLER
24
Q

2

UCC SELLER’S ACTION ON THE PRICE REMEDY IF BUYER FAILS TO PAY FOR GOODS WHEN PAYMENT BECOMES DUE

A
  1. SELLER MAY RECOVER CONTRACT PRICE FOR GOODS
  2. PLUS INCIDENTAL DAMAGES
25
Q

3

UCC ACTION ON THE PRICE TRIGGERS

A
  1. BUYER HAS GOODS AND WONT PAY
  2. OR SELLER MAKES REASONABLE EFFORT TO RESELL GOODS AND CAN’T
  3. OR RESALE OF GOODS WOULD BE FUTILE
26
Q

3

TO ADMIT A PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENT AS SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE UNDER THE FRE, THE OFFERING PARTY MUST SHOW

A
  1. THE PRIOR STATEMENT IS INCONSISTENT WITH WITNESS’S PRESENT TESTIMONY
  2. THE PRIOR STATEMENT WAS GIVEN UNDER OATH
  3. THE WITNESS HAS BEEN X-EXAMINED ABOUT THE PRIOR STATEMENT IN THE CURRENT TRIAL
27
Q

1

TO ADMIT A PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENT AS SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE UNDER THE CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE CODE, THE OFFERING PARTY MUST

A
  1. X-EXAM THE IMPEACHED WITNESS IN THE CURRENT PROCEEDING ABOUT THE STATEMENT
28
Q

2

CEC ALLOWS PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS TO BE ADMITTED AS SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE WHERE THE PRIOR STATEMENTS WERE MADE

A
  1. NOT UNDER OATH
  2. UNDER OATH
29
Q

1

EXCEPTION TO PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENT STATUS AS NON-HEARSAY UNDER FRE - USE OF PCS STATEMENT WILL NOT BE ADMISSIBLE WHERE IT WAS

A
  1. IDENTIFICATION BY WITNESS IN A LINEUP
30
Q

1

THE SCOPE OF X-EXAM FOR A HOSTILE OR NON-HOSTILE WITNESS IS LIMITED TO

A
  1. THE SCOPE OF DIRECT EXAM
31
Q

2

RANDOM AUTOMOBILE STOPS ARE OK IF

A
  1. STOP IS BASED ON NEUTRAL STANDARD
  2. STOPS ARE RELATED TO VEHICLE SAFETY
32
Q

2

IMPEACHMENT OF A WITNESS WITH UNRELATED, COLLATERAL MATTERS

A
  1. IS NOT PERMITTED
  2. NO RELEVANCY
33
Q

1

A FEE SIMPLE DEFEASIBLE MAY TAKE THESE THINGS FROM THE LAND

A
  1. RESOURCES
34
Q

2

SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE - COMMUNICATIONS PRIVILEGE APPLIES TO COMMUNICATIONS MADE

A
  1. DURING MARRIAGE
  2. BY EITHER SPOUSE
35
Q

2

SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE - TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE MAY BE ASSERTED IN

A
  1. CIVIL CASES
  2. CRIMINAL CASES
36
Q

1

SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE - TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE IS HELD BY

A
  1. THE WITNESS SPOUSE
37
Q

3

SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE - FRE - TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE - COURT CANNOT COMPEL A WITNESS

A
  1. TO TESTIFY AGAINST HER SPOUSE
  2. IN A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING
  3. OR CIVIL PROCEEDING UNDER CEC
38
Q
A

CA Bar Outlined and Numbered (with prompts) (43 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions