View Full Version : Grasshopper, the multiple guess legal quiz CONTEST

Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Sam Browning
5/01/2004 9:58pm,
About a week ago I found a ten question multi-choice legal quiz in a publication I will not name. It contained typical questions from the 200 question multiple choice quiz that forms part of almost every bar exam in the USA. I have reproduced this test minus the answer key (with a question of my own) and hereby formally announce this challenge. I will send money to pay for a six pack for which ever person sends me the most correct answers to this test before next Friday night. With the following limitations. The names of the protagonists have been frequently changed to those of Bullshido members for reasons of humor and parody.

a) While Mr. Mantis can compete he will have to score 11/11 to win.

b) While Wing Chun lawyer may compete he will have to score at least a 8/11 to win same goes for K-Bar who is in law school. Minimum score to win among non lawyers and law students is 6/11. My score on the 10 questions was 7/10. I will post your score as soon as I can on the website unless you request otherwise. PLEASE INCLUDE YOUR BULLSHIDO NAME SO I KNOW TO WHOM TO ATTRIBUTE THE SCORE.

c) Scouts (not lawyer's) honor not to look up any legal answers. You must take the test cold and in one sitting. Mail the answers to [email protected] with the word Bullshido in the content discription line.

1) After being fired from his job, Grego drank almost a quart of vodka and decided to ride the bus home. While on the bus, he saw a briefcase he mistakenly thought was his own and struggled with the passanger carrying the briefcase. Grego knocked the passanger to the floor, took the briefcase and fled. Grego was arrested and charged with robbery. Grego should be:

a) Acquitted, because he was intoxicated and used not threats.
b) Acquitted, because his mistake negated the required specific intent.
c) Convicted, because his intoxication was voluntary.
d) Convicted, because mistake is no defense to robbery.

2) Omega went into Asia's garage on Asia's property without permission and borrowed Asia's chain saw. Omega used the saw to clear broken branches from trees on his own next door property. After he had finished, Omega noticed several broken branches on Asia's trees that were in danger of falling on Asia's roof. While Omega was cutting Asia's branches, the saw broke. In a suit for conversion by Asia against Omega will Asia recover?

a) Yes, for the actual damage to the saw.
b) Yes, for the value of the saw before Omega borrowed it.
c) No, because when the saw broke Omega was using it to benefit Asia.
d) No, because Omega did not intend to keep the saw.

3) Shar rushed her 8-year old son Wing Chun Lawyer to the emergancy room at Kingdom hospital after WCL fell off his bicycle and hit his head on a rock. The wound caused by the fall was extensive and bloody. Shar was permitted to remain in the treatment room, and held WCL's hand while the emergancy room physician Riganti, cleaned and sutured the wound. During the procedure, Shar said that she felt faint and stood up to leave the room. Shar fainted and, in falling, struck her head on a metal fixture that protruded from the emergancy room wall. She suffered a severe injury as a consequence. If Shar sues Kingdom hospital to recover damages will she prevail?

a) Yes, because Shar was a public invitee of the Hospital's
b) Yes, unless the fixture was an obvious, commonly used and essential part of the hospital's equipment.
c) No, unless Hospital's personnel failed to take reasonable steps to anticipate and prevent Shar's injury.
d) No, because hospital's personnel owed Shar no affirmative duty of care.

4) Samuel Browning (SB) wanted to make some money so he decided to sell cocaine. He asked Mr. Mantis who was reputed to have access to illegal drugs to supply him with cocaine for resale. Mr. Mantis agreed and sold SB a bag of white powder. SB repackaged the white powder into smaller containers and sold one to K-Bar, an undercover police officer who promptly arrested SB. SB confessed and said Mr. Mantis was his supplier. On examination the white powder was found to not to be cocaine or any type of illegal substance. If Mr. Mantis knew the white powder was not cocaine but SB believed it was, which of the following is correct?

a) Mr. Mantis and SB are guilty of attempting to sell cocaine.
b) Neither Mr. Mantis nor SB is guilty of attempting to sell cocaine.
c) Mr. Mantis is guilty of attempting to sell cocaine but SB is not.
d) Mr. Mantis is not guilty of attempting to sell cocaine but SB is.

5) City enacted an ordinance banning from its public sidewalks all machines dispensing publications consisting wholly of commercial advertisements. The ordinance was enacted because of a concern about adverse aesthetic effects of litter from publications distributed on sidewalks and streets. However, City continued to allow machines dispensing other types of publications on the public sidewalks. As a result of the City ordinance, 30 of the 300 sidewalk machines that were dispensing publications in City were removed. Is this ordinance constitutional?

a) Yes, because regulations of commercial speech are subject only to the requirement that they be rationally related to a legitimate state goal, and that requirement is satisfied here.
b) Yes, because City has a compelling interest in protecting the aesthetics of its sidewalks and streets, and such a ban is necessary to vindicate this interest.
c) No, because it does not constitute the least restrictive means with which to protect the aesthetics of City's sidewalks and streets.
d) No, because there is not a reasonable fit between the legitimate interest of City in preserving the aesthetics of its sidewalks and streets and the means it chose to advance that interest.

6) Asia and Ashida are students in an advanced high school Japanese class long before Bullshido existed. During an argument in the cafeteria in the presence of other students, Asia, in Japanese, accuses Ashida of stealing his Stephen Hayes books from his locker. In a defamation suit brought by Ashida against Asia, Ashida will:

a) Prevail, because Asia's accusation constituted slander per se.
b) Prevail, because the defamatory statement was made in the presence of third persons.
c) Not prevail, unless Asia made the accusation with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of the truth.
d) Not prevail, unless one or more of the other students understood Japanese.

7) Damian, a 2 year old, became ill with meningitis. Freddy and Tiger Fly, his parents, were members of a group that believed fervently that if they prayed enough, God would not let their child die. Accordingly, they did not seek medical aid for Damian and refused all offers of such aid. They prayed continuously. Damian died of the illness within the week. Freedy and Tiger Fly are charged with murder in a common law jurisdiction. Their best defense to the charge is:

a) They did not intend to kill or harm Damian.
b) They were pursuing a constitutionally protected religious belief.
c) Damian's death was not proximately caused by their conduct.
d) they neither premeditated or deliberated.

8) Suspecting that Phrost had slain his ex-wife, police detectives persuaded one of Phrost's employees to remove a drinking glass from Phrost's office so it could be used for fingerprint comparisons with a knife found near the body. The fingerprints matched. The prosecutor announced that he would present evidence to the grand jury. Phrost's lawyer immediately filed a motion to suppress the evidence of the fingerprint comparisons to bar its consideration by the grand jury, contending that the evidence was illegally acquired. The motion should be:

a) Granted, because if there was no probable cause, the grand jury should not consider the evidence.
b) Granted, because the employee was acting as a police agent and his seizure of the glass without a warrant was unconsitutional.
c) Denied, because motions based on the exclusionary rule are premature in grand jury proceedings.
d) Denied, because the glass was removed from Phrost's possession by a private citizen and not a police officer.

[See next post for remaining three questions]

Sam Browning
5/01/2004 10:35pm,
9) As a result of an accident at the DRD nuclear power plant, a small quantity of radioactive vapor escaped and and two members of the public were exposed to excessive radiation. According to qualified medical opinion, that exposure will double the chance that these two persons will develop cancer. However, any cancer that might be caused by this exposure will not be detectable for at least 10 years. If the two exposed people develop cancer, it will not be possible to determine whether it was caused by this exposure or would have developed in any event. If the exposed persons assert a claim for damages against DRD shortly after the escape of the radiation, which of the following questions will not present a substantial issue?

a) Will the court recognize that the plaintiffs have suffered a present legal injury?
b) Can the plaintiffs prove the amount of their damages?
c) Can the plaintiffs prove that any harm they may suffer was caused by this exposure?
d) Can tthe plaintiffs prevail without presenting evidence of specific negligence on the part of DRD?

10) Kungfoolss is being tried for the homicide of a stylist whose strangled body was found besides a remote logging road with their hands tied together. After Kungfoolss offered an alibi, the state called Phil to to testify that Kungfoolss had taped his hands and tried to strangle him in the same location two days before the homicide but he escaped. This evidence is:

a) Admissible, as tending to show Kungfoolss as the killer.
b) Admissible, as tending to show Kungfools's violent nature.
c) Inadmissible, because it is improper character evidence.
d) Inadmissible, because it is unfairly prejudicial.

11) Veriden, age 18, is guest teaching at a ninja dojo in Lake Alfred, Florida when a cute girl in the front of the class starts flirting with him. After the class is over they get drunk and she tells Veriden, "I really want to sleep with you in the worst way and I'm 17." Veriden does the dirty deed and the next morning the girl wakes him up and proudly announces "I'm only fourteen". Assuming that all of these facts are proven in court, will Veriden be convicted of statutory rape?

a) No, he did not form the required intent to sleep with a woman under the age of consent.
b) No, if the jury accepts the argument that the alcohol negated the necessary intent to commit this crime.
c) No, the woman's misrepresentation of her age provided a defense to this crime.
d) Yes, unless that Veriden can prove this affirmative misrepresentation defense by clear and convincing evidence.
e) Yes, unless Veriden can establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew she was of age.
f) Yes, statutory rape is a strict liability offense for which intent is not required.

Mr. Mantis
5/02/2004 8:21am,
Originally posted by Samuel Browning

a) While Mr. Mantis can compete he will have to score 11/11 to win.

WHAT! Well alright, but I drink very expensive beer!

Mr. Mantis
5/02/2004 8:54am,
Originally posted by Samuel Browning
SB confessed and said Mr. Mantis was his supplier.

You dirty snich!

WingChun Lawyer
5/02/2004 10:15am,
9 out of 11 is bloody unfair, we have different CONSTITUTIONS by chrissake! "grumble"

Alright, I'll do it tomorrow.

Sam Browning
5/02/2004 11:39am,
Okay WingChunLawyer I'll drop you and Ka-bar to 8 instead of nine handicap. Happy? There is only one deep constitutional question on the test. #5.

Here are our present scores:

Mr. Mantis, 9/11 (right/total)
Greese1, 3/11
Bunyip, 3/11
Poet, 6/11 our current leader (with handicap) who owes it all to watching Law n' order.

Mr. Mantis
5/02/2004 11:54am,
Originally posted by Samuel Browning

Here are our present scores:

Mr. Mantis, 9/11 (right/total)

What!?! I was robbed!!!

Mr. Browning, you know all of my answers were TH3 C0RR3cT!!! on TH3 StR33T!!11!!

Your answer key would get pwned in a real courtroom fight!!11!

5/02/2004 1:38pm,
Originally posted by Samuel Browning
Bunyip, 3/11

Man. I was hoping to at least do better than random guessing.

5/02/2004 2:11pm,
I submitted mine!

Sam Browning
5/02/2004 5:32pm,
Mr. Mantis, since I did not write the first 10 questions I have to accept the answer key that came with them. Unfortunately one does lose points on the bar exam if one selects an answer that may be correct but is not as good as the best answer (you're second mistake) Secondly on your first mistake we are in common law land where certain loopholes have not been closed by a legislature, if it makes you feel better I lost a point on another question for this exact same reason.

Ghost 5/11
Brand 1/11 (don't worry I'm sure I'll get butchered when I take your science quiz)
The Wastrel scored a 4/11.

There was one other person who I believe submitted an answer key and whose post I accidentally erased, please send it again and accept my profound apologies.

Deadpan Scientist
5/02/2004 5:33pm,

Sam Browning
5/02/2004 5:35pm,
You're a scientist, not a lawyer, you actually might become a productive member of society, (unlike myself)

Sam Browning
5/02/2004 7:02pm,
Originally posted by bunyip
Man. I was hoping to at least do better than random guessing.

Actually you did since there were 4 possible answers per question (except for the last one) 3 correct out of 11 is higher then 25%.

Update: DCS got 5/11

5/02/2004 7:15pm,

I have to watch more TV.

5/02/2004 9:33pm,
I make a motion the quiz closes now!

5/02/2004 10:53pm,
I have submitted mine.