Practice Exam Weeks 1-9

Question 1

A court opinion is “binding precedent” when

Answer 1

It is from the same jurisdiction and from a court higher in the chain of appeal, involving similar law and facts.

Question 2

Binding precedent

Answer 2

Explanation: Binding precedent requires that the opinion comes from a higher court within the same jurisdiction, ensuring consistency and adherence to established legal principles.

Question 3

Which statement is true regarding primary and secondary authority?

Answer 3

Primary authority can be binding or persuasive authority.

Question 4

Primary authority

Answer 4

Primary authority, such as statutes and case law, can be either binding or persuasive, while

Question 5

Secondary authority

Answer 5

secondary authority, like law reviews, is typically persuasive but not binding.

For example, consider a California statute, primary authority, is binding authority in California, and persuasive authority in Ohio.

Question 6

The Environmental Protection Agency, a federal agency, promulgates a regulation that conflicts with a state statute. Which law takes priority?

Answer 6

The federal regulation because of the Supremacy Clause.

Explanation: The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution establishes that federal law takes precedence over conflicting state laws.

Question 7

The Supremacy Clause

Answer 7

The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution establishes that federal law takes precedence over conflicting state laws.

Question 8

During a job interview, the hiring manager unconsciously favors a candidate who shares the same alma mater, despite other applicants having equivalent qualifications. Later, the hiring manager explicitly states that they will not consider applicants who identify as female.

Answer 8

The first sentence demonstrates implicit bias, and the second sentence demonstrates explicit bias.

Question 9

Implicit bias

Answer 9

involves unconscious preferences

Question 10

Explicit bias

Answer 10

involves conscious and deliberate discrimination

Question 11

Pedro, a citizen of state A, sues Demetria, a citizen of State B, in a federal district court based on claims arising under California state law. The amount in controversy is $75,000 excluding interest and costs. Does the federal district court likely have subject matter jurisdiction?

Answer 11

No, because the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000.

Question 12

What is Subject matter jurisdiction?

Question 13

In Thing v. La Chusa, the Supreme Court of California refined the Dillon test to create a clearer-cut rule. The California Assembly and California Senate pass a bill (“The California Bystander Recovery Act” or TCBRA) that Governor Newsome signs into law. The statute conflicts with the Thing decision. Which law takes priority?

Answer 13

The statute takes priority over common law.

Question 14

Statutory Law

Answer 14

Statutory law typically takes precedence over common law when there is a direct conflict.

Question 15

Which answer choice is the most accurate?

Answer 15

Remedial statutes are generally broadly construed and penal statutes are generally narrowly construed.

Question 16

Remedial statutes

Answer 16

Remedial statutes are interpreted broadly to provide relief

Question 17

Penal statutes

Answer 17

penal statutes are interpreted narrowly to protect individuals from unjust punishment.

Question 18

Which of the following statements best describes a key difference between the state and federal court systems in the United States?

Answer 18

State courts have general subject matter jurisdiction, while federal courts have limited subject matter jurisdiction.

Question 19

State courts

Answer 19

have general jurisdiction, meaning they can hear a wide variety of cases including those involving state and federal law.

Question 20

Federal courts

Answer 20

have limited jurisdiction and can only hear cases authorized by the Constitution of federal statutes, such as cases involving federal law, disputes between states, or cases involving parties from different states (diversity jurisdiction).

Question 21

Which of the following statements best illustrates the application of the expressio unius est exclusio alterius (the expression of one is the exclusion of others) canon of statutory interpretation?

Answer 21

A statute specifies that “dogs, cats, and rabbits” are allowed as pets in a housing complex, and a court rules that birds are not allowed as pets in the housing complex.

Question 22

Expressio unius est exclusio alterius canon

Answer 22

The “expression of one is the exclusion of others” canon, suggests that when a law lists specific items, it implies that anything not listed is excluded. In this case, the statute specifying “dogs, cats, and rabbits” implies that other animals, like birds, are not allowed as pets in the housing complex.

Question 23

The US Supreme Court is deciding on a state issue that has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of California. Which of the following statements is most accurate?

Answer 23

The interpretation by the California Supreme Court is mandatory authority.

Explanation: In matters of state law, the interpretation by the state’s highest court (California Supreme Court) is binding.

Question 24

Which of the following statements is most accurate?

Answer 24

The Dillon court considered the potential consequences of limitless liability and fraudulent claims in its decision-making process.

Explanation: The Dillon court public policy implications such as the potential for limitless liability and fraudulent claims.

Question 25

In what way did Ochoa expand Dillon?

Answer 25

The Ochoa court eliminated the Dillon “sudden occurrence” requirement.

Question 26

Ochoa

Answer 26

eliminated the requirement that the emotional distress must result from a “sudden occurrence.”

Question 27

Thing v. La Chusa sets out a new test allowing recovery for negligent infliction of emotional distress if the plaintiff:

Answer 27

1. is closely related to the injury victim.
2. is present at the scene of the injury producing event at the time it occurs.
3. Contemporaneous aware that it is causing injury to the victim (sight, hear, touch, feel)
4. as a result, suffers serious emotional distress beyond which would be expected of a disinterested witness.

Question 28

What is the significance of the Ko decision?

Answer 28

The plaintiff need not be physically present at the scene of the injury-producing event.

Question 29

Ko v. State of California

Answer 29

eliminated the physical presence requirement that had been read into the Dillon test.

Question 30

Pau sues Dolly to recover damages for emotional distress. Thing is the applicable law. Pau proves that he is closely related to the injury victim; was present at the scene of the injury-producing event at the time it occurred and he was then aware that it was causing injury to the victim but is unable to prove that, as a result suffers emotional distress beyond that which would be anticipated in a disinterested witness. The inability to sufficiently prove #3 is likely:

Answer 30

Fatal to Pau’s claim.

Explanation: All elements of the Thing test must be satisfied for a claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress; failure to prove any element is fatal to the claim.

Question 31

A state law mandates that “no vehicles are allowed in the park.” A person is fined for riding a bicycle in the park and challenges the fine. The court, considering the legislative history, determines that the law was intended to prevent noise and pollution caused by motor vehicles. When interpreting the state law to avoid an unreasonable outcome, such as prohibiting bicycles, the court most likely applies which interpretative approach?

Answer 31

Golden Rule or Social Purpose Approach

Question 32

Golden Rule and the Social Purpose Approach

Answer 32

Both the Golden Rule and the Social Purpose Approach allow courts to consider legislative intent or purpose to avoid absurd or unreasonable outcomes. These approaches enable the court to interpret the law in a way that aligns with its intended purpose, rather than adhering strictly to the literal wording that may produce an absurd result.

Question 33

Which of the following best describes the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States?

Answer 33

Both original jurisdiction (in specific cases) and appellate jurisdiction.

Explanation: The U.S. Supreme Court has both original jurisdiction (in specific cases, such as disputes between states) and appellate jurisdiction. This means that while the Court primarily hears appeals from lower federal and state courts, it also has the authority to hear certain cases first, without them going through lower courts.

Question 34

Which statement best describes the nature of the U.S. Supreme Court’s review process under a writ of certiorari?

Answer 34

Review on a writ of certiorari is at the discretion of the Supreme Court and not a matter of right.

Question 35

Writ of certiorari

Answer 35

The U.S. Supreme Court has discretionary review on a writ of certiorari, meaning it chooses which cases to hear based on its criteria. This allows the Court to manage its docket and focus on cases that have significant legal implications, ensuring that it addresses the most critical and pertinent issues in federal law.

Question 36

The role of the legislative branch of government is to enact the law. What are the primary roles of the executive and judicial branches?

Answer 36

The executive branch enforces the law, and the judicial branch interprets the law.

Question 37

Which statement most accurately reflects the current state of judicial authority to create common law in the United States?

Answer 37

Courts have the authority to create law when there is no governing constitutional provision, statute, or administrative regulation governing the case.

Question 38

Federalism is

Answer 38

A fundamental aspect of the United States’ constitutional structure, distributing power between the national and state governments.

Question 39

The role of the Supreme Court of California in the state’s judicial hierarchy is best described as:

Answer 39

The highest state court and the court of last resort in California.

Question 40

The Supreme Court of California

Answer 40

The Supreme Court of California is the highest court in the state and serves as the court of last resort. It reviews decisions from the lower appellate courts and ensures consistency and uniformity in the interpretation of state law. This court plays a critical role in the judicial hierarchy, providing final legal authority on state matters.

Question 41

Which of the following best describes the correct progression of a federal case through the appellate system, starting from a trial in the federal district court?

Answer 41

1. U.S. District Court,
2. U.S. Court of Appeals,
3. U.S. Supreme Court

Question 42

Court Hierarchical Structure

Answer 42

The correct progression of a federal case through the appellate system starts with a trial in the U.S. District Court (the trial court), followed by an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals (the intermediate appellate court), and potentially a final appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court (the highest court). This hierarchical structure allows for a systematic review and ensures that legal issues are thoroughly examined at multiple levels.

Question 43

The Dillon court held that:

Answer 43

Plaintiff can recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress even if they are not within the “zone of danger.”

Question 44

Did the Dillon court allow recovery for NIED?

Answer 44

Yes, the Dillon court allowed recovery for negligent infliction of emotional distress even if the plaintiff was not within the “zone of danger,” broadening the scope of potential recovery.

Question 45

According to New York’s Consolidated Laws, one must be 18 years old to be a member of a corporate board of directors. New York common law allows anyone who has reached the age of 16 to become a member of a corporate board of directors. The laws directly conflict. Which authority takes priority?

Answer 45

The New York Consolidated Laws.

Explanation: Statutory law, such as New York’s Consolidated Laws, takes precedence over common law when there is a direct conflict between the two.