imone/ARB huggingface dataset:
Question: In a contract suit by Perez against Drake, each of the following is an accepted method of authenticating Drake's signature on a document offered by Perez except:

Options:
A. A nonexpert who, in preparation for trial, has familiarized himself with Drake's usual signature testifies that, in his opinion, the questioned signature is genuine.
B. The jury, without the assistance of an expert, compares the questioned signature with an admittedly authentic sample of Drake's handwriting.
C. A witness offers proof that the signature is on a document that has been in existence for at least 20 years, that was in a place where it would likely be if it was authentic, and that has no suspicious circumstances surrounding it.
D. A witness testifies that Drake admitted that the signature was his. 
Answer: A
Question: Jaywalking (crossing a street outside of a crosswalk or not at an intersection) is punishable by a fine in Metropolis. Bert, who had lived in Metropolis all of his 67 years, was out windowshopping with his wife, Ruth, also 67 , when he saw a friend across the street at a diner they both frequented. Telling Ruth that he would be right back, he saw that there were no cars nearby and so strode briskly across the street in the middle of the block. As he reached the other sidewalk, a police officer who had been checking parked cars for parking violations stepped up to Bert and said, "Hold it buddy, let's see your driver's license," and then reached for her citation book. Bert, a city dweller from birth, had always walked or used public transportation, had never learned to drive, and did not have a driver's license. When he told the officer that he did not have a driver's license, she said, "All right, I'm taking you in," and seized his wrist, twisting it up and behind him in a personnel control lock. A black belt in judo, Bert easily slipped the officer's grasp. "You asked for it," she then growled, and pulled her baton from her belt. When she attempted to strike Bert, he moved swiftly to the side, chopped at her arm, and caused the baton to fall from her grasp to the pavement. At that point two other officers arrived on the scene and arrested Bert. Ruth watched the entire episode from across the street and became greatly distressed. 34. Bert brings an action against the first officer for battery. What will be the probable outcome of this litigation? (A) He will lose, because he struck the officer. (B) He will lose, because the offense was committed in the officer's presence. (C) He will win, unless he is found guilty of jaywalking. (D) He will win, because the officer was not privileged to arrest him. If Dunken is charged with first degree murder for the death of the security guard, the court should charge the jury on the issue of the defense of intoxication that:

Options:
A. Voluntary intoxication is no defense to the crime of first degree murder as defined by the statute.
B. Voluntary intoxication is a defense to the crime of first degree murder if Dunken would not have killed the security guard but for the intoxication.
C. Voluntary intoxication is a defense to the crime of first degree murder if it prevented Dunken from forming the intent to commit a burglary.
Answer: C
Question: As part of a comprehensive federal aid-toeducation program, Congress included the following provisions as conditions for state receipt of federal funds: (1) Whenever textbooks are provided to students without charge, they must include no religious instruction and must be made available on the same terms to students in all public and private schools accredited by the state educational authority. (2) Salary supplements can be paid to teachers in public and private schools, up to $10 \%$ of existing salary schedules, where present compensation is less than the average salary for persons of comparable training and experience, provided that no such supplement is paid to any teacher who instructs in religious subjects. (3) Construction grants can be made toward the cost of physical plants at private colleges and universities, provided that no part of the grant is used for buildings in which instruction in religious subject matters is offered. Federal taxpayer Bates also challenges the construction grants to church-operated private colleges and universities. The most likely result is that the construction grants will be:

Options:
A. Sustained, because aid to one aspect of an institution of higher education not shown to be pervasively sectarian does not necessarily free it to spend its other resources for religious purposes.
B. Sustained, because bricks and mortar do not aid religion in a way forbidden by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
C. Held unconstitutional, because any financial aid to a church-operated school strengthens the religious purposes of the institution.
D. Held unconstitutional, because the grants involve or cause an excessive entanglement with religion. 
Answer: A
Question: Seller and Buyer executed an agreement for the sale of real property. Assume for this question only that Seller dies before closing and his will leaves his personal property to Perry and his real property to Rose. There being no breach of the agreement by either party, which of the following is correct?

Options:
A. Death, an eventuality for which the parties could have provided, terminates the agreement if they did not so provide. 
B. Rose is entitled to the proceeds of the sale when it closes, because the doctrine of equitable conversion does not apply to these circumstances.
C. Perry is entitled to the proceeds of the sale when it closes.
D. Title was rendered unmarketable by Seller's death.
Answer: C
Question: Dunbar and Balcom went into a drugstore, where Dunbar reached into the cash register and took out $ 200$. Stone, the owner of the store, came out of a back room, saw what had happened, and told Dunbar to put the money back. Balcom then took a revolver from under his coat and shot and killed Stone. Dunbar claims that Stone owed her $ 200$ and that she went to the drugstore to try to collect the debt. She said that she asked Balcom to come along just in case Stone made trouble but that she did not plan on using any force and did not know that Balcom was armed. 145. If Dunbar is prosecuted for murder on the basis of felony murder and the jury believes her claim, she should be found: (A) Guilty, because her companion, Balcom, committed a homicide in the course of a felony. (B) Guilty, because her taking Balcom with her to the store created the risk of death that occurred during the commission of a felony. (C) Not guilty, because she did not know that Balcom was armed and thus did not have the required mental state for felony murder. (D) Not guilty, because she believed she was entitled to the money and thus did not intend to steal. The modification between Barnes and Stevens reducing the contractual amounts by $50 \%$ was:

Options:
A. Enforceable in all respects.
B. Enforceable only to the extent of beeswax tendered by Stevens.
C. Unenforceable, because there was no consideration for Barnes's promise to take only one-half of the production.
Answer: A
Question: A statute of the state of Tuscarora made it a misdemeanor to construct any building of more than five stories without an automatic fire sprinkler system. A local construction company built, in Tuscarora, a 10-story federal office building. It constructed the building according to the precise specifications of a federal contract authorized by federal statutes. Because the building was built without the automatic fire sprinkler system required by state law, Tuscarora prosecutes the private contractor. Which of the following is the company's strongest defense to that prosecution?

Options:
A. The state sprinkler requirement denies the company property or liberty without due process.
B. The state sprinkler requirement denies the company equal protection of the laws.
C. As applied, the state sprinkler requirement violates the Supremacy Clause.
D. As applied, the state sprinkler requirement violates the Obligation of Contracts Clause.
Answer: C
Question: David is being tried in federal court for criminal conspiracy with John to violate federal narcotics law. At trial, the prosecutor calls David's new wife, Wanda, and asks her to testify about a meeting between David and John that she observed before she married David. Which of the following is the most accurate statement of the applicable rule concerning whether Wanda may testify?

Options:
A. The choice is Wanda's.
B. The choice is David's.
C. Wanda is permitted to testify only if both Wanda and David agree.
D. Wanda is compelled to testify even if both Wanda and David object.
Answer: A
Question: For a valuable consideration, Amato, the owner of Riveracre, signed and gave to Barton a duly executed instrument that provided as follows: "The grantor may or may not sell Riveracre during her lifetime, but at her death, or if she earlier decides to sell, the property will be offered to Barton at $ 500$ per acre. Barton shall exercise this right, if at all, within 60 days of receipt of said offer to sell." Barton recorded the instrument. The instrument was not valid as a will. Is Barton's right under the instrument valid?

Options:
A. Yes, because the instrument is recorded.
B. Yes, because Barton's right to purchase will vest or fail within the period prescribed by the Rule Against Perpetuities.
C. No, because Barton's right to purchase is a restraint on the owner's power to make a testamentary disposition.
D. No, because Barton's right to purchase is an unreasonable restraint on alienation.
Answer: B
Question: Husband and Wife were going through a nasty divorce. Wife hired Patrick, a retired detective, to spy on Husband. Patrick followed Husband to Hotel, where he saw Husband meet a woman and go into her hotel room. Patrick checked into the adjoining room, placed an electronic listening device on the wall, and listened to the activities of Husband and the woman in the next room. While Patrick was listening, a burglar broke into Patrick's room and hit Patrick over the head with a blackjack. As a result, Patrick was hospitalized. A state statute makes adultery a crime. 121. If Patrick sues Hotel for his injuries: (A) Patrick will prevail if Hotel's management had reason to believe the hotel room locks were inadequate. (B) Patrick will prevail, because innkeepers owe their guests a very high degree of care. (C) Hotel will prevail, because the burglar was a superseding intervening cause. (D) Hotel will prevail if it was in compliance with a state statute setting minimum standards for hotel room locks. Assuming that Sawtooth committed a total breach on March 1, what would be the probable measure of Farquart's damages in an action against Sawtooth for breach of contract?

Options:
A. Restitution of the three monthly installments paid in August, September, and October.
B. What it would cost to get the house completed by another contractor, minus installments not yet paid to Sawtooth.
C. The difference between the market value of the partly built house, as of the time of Sawtooth's breach, and the market value of the house if completed according to specifications.
Answer: B
Question: Congress passes an Energy Conservation Act. The Act requires all users of energy in this country to reduce their consumption by a specified percentage, to be set by a presidential executive order. The Act sets forth specific standards the President must use in setting the percentage and detailed procedures to be followed. The provision that allows the President to set the exact percentage is probably:

Options:
A. Constitutional, because it creates a limited administrative power to implement the statute.
B. Constitutional, because inherent executive powers permit such action even without statutory authorization.
C. Unconstitutional as an undue delegation of legislative power to the executive.
D. Unconstitutional, because it violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
Answer: A
Question: A recently enacted state law forbids nonresident aliens from owning more than 100 acres of land within the state and directs the state attorney general to bring an action of ejectment whenever a nonresident alien owns such land. Zane, a nonresident alien, has obtained title to 200 acres of land in the state, and he brings an action in federal court to enjoin the state attorney general from enforcing the statute. The defendant moves to dismiss the complaint. The federal court should:

Options:
A. Dismiss the action, because under the Constitution, nonresident aliens may not sue in federal court.
B. Dismiss the action, because a state has plenary power to determine the qualifications for landholding within its boundaries.
C. Hear the action, because the United Nations Charter forbids such discrimination.
D. Hear the action, because a federal question is presented. 
Answer: D
Question: The state of Champlain enacts the Young Adult Marriage Counseling Act, which provides that, before any persons less than 30 years of age may be issued a marriage license, they must receive at least five hours of marriage counseling from a state-licensed social worker. This counseling is designed to ensure that applicants for marriage licenses know their legal rights and duties in relation to marriage and parenthood, understand the "true nature" of the marriage relationship, and understand the procedures for obtaining divorces. In a case in which the constitutionality of the Young Adult Marriage Counseling Act is in issue, the burden of persuasion will probably be on the: 

Options:
A. Person challenging the law, because there is a strong presumption that elected state legislators acted properly.
B. Person challenging the law, because the Tenth Amendment authorizes states to determine the conditions on which they issue marriage licenses.
C. State, because there is a substantial impact on the right to marry, and that right is fundamental.
D. State, because there is a substantial impact on the discrete and insular class of young adults.
Answer: C
Question: Amy Docent, a state college instructor, was discharged because of her refusal to comply with a state statute requiring public employees to swear or affirm that they will (1) "uphold and defend" the state and federal constitutions, and (2) "oppose the overthrow" of the state or federal governments "by force, violence, or by any improper method." The statute had previously been held constitutional by the state supreme court. Docent filed a complaint in federal district court alleging the unconstitutionality of the statute and seeking an injunction and damages. Which of the following is the state's strongest argument for sustaining the validity of the statute?

Options:
A. Government employment is a privilege, not a right.
B. The oath as a whole is only a commitment to abide by constitutional processes.
C. The First and Fourteenth Amendments permit a state to fix the conditions of state employment.
D. The state has a compelling need to keep disloyal persons out of governmental positions of trust. 
Answer: B
Question: Hunko, a popular professional wrestler, entered into a written agency contract with Adman, who agreed to try to get Hunko's picture on a variety of food products. Hunko promised that Adman would have the exclusive right to promote Hunko on food product lines. They agreed that Hunko would receive $70 \%$ of the proceeds and Adman would receive $30 \%$. Adman was able to persuade the makers of "Chocolate Charms" breakfast cereal to put Hunko's picture on the cereal boxes. Shortly after Adman confirmed the Chocolate Charms deal with the cereal manufacturer, Hunko and Adman agreed orally that henceforth Hunko would receive $50 \%$ of the proceeds, including proceeds from the Chocolate Charms deal, and Adman would receive the other $50 \%$. Hunko received a $ 10,000$ check from Chocolate Charms, and he promptly sent Adman a check for $ 3,000$. Adman demanded an additional $ 2,000$, but Hunko refused to pay. If Adman sues Hunko for the $ 2,000$, the party likely to prevail is:

Options:
A. Hunko, because of the parol evidence rule.
B. Adman, because consideration is not required for a modification.
C. Hunko, because Adman had a preexisting legal duty to secure food product promotions for Hunko.
D. Hunko, because an exclusive contract requires that the party given the privileges of exclusivity use his best efforts. 
Answer: C
Question: Cycle Company manufactured a bicycle that it sold to Bike Shop, a retail bicycle dealer, which in turn sold it to Roth. Shortly thereafter, while Roth was riding the bicycle along a city street, he saw a traffic light facing him turn from green to amber. He sped up, hoping to cross the intersection before the light turned red. However, Roth quickly realized that he could not do so and applied the brake, which failed. To avoid the traffic that was then crossing in front of him, Roth turned sharply to his right and onto the sidewalk, where he struck Perez, a pedestrian. Both Perez and Roth sustained injuries. Assume that the jurisdiction follows traditional contributory negligence rules. For this question only, assume the following facts. Amicusbank lent Bouquet $ 200,000$ and Bouquet executed a written instrument providing that Amicusbank "is entitled to collect the debt from my share of the profits, if any, under the Vintage-Bouquet contract." Amicusbank gave prompt notice of this transaction to Vintage. If Vintage thereafter refuses to account for any profits to Amicusbank and Amicusbank sues Vintage for Bouquet's share of profits then realized, Vintage's strongest argument in defense is that:

Options:
A. The Bouquet-Vintage contract did not expressly authorize an assignment of rights.
B. Bouquet and Vintage are partners, not simply debtor and creditor.
C. Amicusbank is not an assignee of Bouquet's rights under the BouquetVintage contract.
D. Amicusbank is not an intended thirdparty beneficiary of the BouquetVintage contract.
Answer: C
Question: Three states, East Winnetka, Midland, and West Hampton, are located next to one another in that order. The states of East Winnetka and West Hampton permit the hunting and trapping of snipe, but the state of Midland strictly forbids it in order to protect snipe, a rare species of animal, from extinction. The state of Midland has a state statute that provides, "Possession of snipe traps is prohibited. Any game warden finding a snipe trap within the state shall seize and destroy it." Snipe traps cost about $ 15$ each. Prentis is a resident of West Hampton and an ardent snipe trapper. She drove her car to East Winnetka to purchase a new improved snipe trap from a manufacturer there. In the course of her trip back across Midland with the trap in her car, Prentis stopped in a Midland state park to camp for a few nights. While she was in that park, a Midland game warden saw the trap, which was visible on the front seat of her car. The warden seized the trap and destroyed it in accordance with the Midland statute after Prentis admitted that the seized item was a prohibited snipe trap. No federal statutes or federal administrative regulations apply. For this question only, assume that Prentis demonstrates that common carriers are permitted to transport snipe traps as cargo across Midland for delivery to another state and that, in practice, the Midland statute is enforced only against private individuals transporting those traps in private vehicles. If Prentis challenges the application of the Midland statute to her on the basis only of a denial of equal protection, this application of the statute will probably be found:

Options:
A. Constitutional, because the traps constitute contraband in which Prentis could have no protected property interest.
B. Constitutional, because there is a rational basis for differentiating between the possession of snipe traps as interstate cargo by common carriers and the possession of snipe traps by private individuals.
C. Unconstitutional, because the state cannot demonstrate a compelling public purpose for making this differentiation between common carriers and such private individuals.
D. Unconstitutional, because interstate travel is a fundamental right that may not be burdened by state law.
Answer: B
Question: Congress enacted a law prohibiting the killing, capture, or removal of any form of wildlife upon or from any federally owned land. Which of the following is the most easily justifiable source of national authority for this federal law?

Options:
A. The Commerce Clause of Article I, Section 8.
B. The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV.
C. The Enforcement Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
D. The Property Clause of Article IV, Section 3.
Answer: D
Question: The state of Missoula has enacted a new election code designed to increase voter responsibility in the exercise of the franchise and to enlarge citizen participation in the electoral process. None of its provisions conflict with federal statutes. Which of the following is the strongest reason for finding unconstitutional a requirement in the Missoula election code that each voter must be literate in English?

Options:
A. The requirement violates Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, which provides that representatives to Congress be chosen "by the people of the several States."
B. The requirement violates Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to "make or alter" state regulations providing for the "times" and "manner" of holding elections for senators and representatives.
C. The requirement violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
D. The requirement violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Answer: D
Question: The state of Champlain enacts the Young Adult Marriage Counseling Act, which provides that, before any persons less than 30 years of age may be issued a marriage license, they must receive at least five hours of marriage counseling from a state-licensed social worker. This counseling is designed to ensure that applicants for marriage licenses know their legal rights and duties in relation to marriage and parenthood, understand the "true nature" of the marriage relationship, and understand the procedures for obtaining divorces. Pine, aged 25 , contemplates marrying Ross, aged 25. Both are residents of the state of Champlain. Pine has not yet proposed to Ross because he is offended by the counseling requirement. Pine sues in federal court seeking a declaratory judgment that the Young Adult Marriage Counseling Act is unconstitutional. Which of the following is the clearest ground for dismissal of this action by the court?

Options:
A. Pine and Ross are residents of the same state.
B. No substantial federal question is presented.
C. The suit presents a nonjusticiable political question.
D. The suit is unripe.
Answer: D
Question: In a telephone call on March 1, Adams, an unemployed, retired person, said to Dawes, "I will sell my automobile for $ 3,000$ cash. I will hold this offer open through March 14." On March 12, Adams called Dawes and told her that he had sold the automobile to Clark. Adams in fact had not sold the automobile to anyone. On March 14, Dawes learned that Adams still owned the automobile, and on that date called Adams and said, "I' $\mathrm{m}$ coming over to your place with $ 3,000$." Adams replied, "Don't bother. I won' $t$ deliver the automobile to you under any circumstances." Dawes protested, but made no further attempt to pay for or take delivery of the automobile. In an action by Dawes against Adams for breach of contract, Dawes probably will:

Options:
A. Succeed, because Adams had assured her that the offer would remain open through March 14.
B. Succeed, because Adams had not in fact sold the automobile to Clark.
C. Not succeed, because Dawes had not tendered the $ 3,000$ to Adams on or before March 14.
D. Not succeed, because on March 12, Adams had told Dawes that he had sold the automobile to Clark.
Answer: D