imone/ARB huggingface dataset:
Question: In which of the following situations is the defendant least likely to be found guilty of an attempted crime?

Options:
A. In order to track down "fences" and other distributors of stolen goods, police officers, with permission of the owners and insurers, forward stolen jewelry they have intercepted on the way to Don, a reputed fence. Don takes the jewelry, which he believes to be stolen. Don is arrested and charged with attempted receipt of stolen goods.
B. Dewey, a 21-year-old male, believes the "age of consent" in the state to be 18 , and that sexual intercourse with a female under the age of 18 constitutes statutory rape. In fact, the statute applies only to females under the age of 16 . Dewey's girlfriend, Irma, is 17 years of age. With Irma's consent, Dewey engages in sexual intercourse with Irma. Later, Dewey brags in a bar, "I just made it with some jailbait." Dewey is arrested and charged with attempted statutory rape.
C. Doreen, a community activist, is outraged that a bill to place greater restrictions on picketing is being debated in the state legislature. Doreen asks her lawyer, Lax, if she can conduct a demonstration in the state capitol building, where the legislature sits. Lax assures her that the United States Supreme Court has recently upheld a very similar case and tells Doreen she should act freely "because the First Amendment protects you." In fact, Lax did not read the case carefully. The Court allowed demonstrations on the capitol grounds, but not in the building itself. As Doreen carries her picket sign into the state capitol building, she is arrested by security guards and is charged by state police with attempting to conduct an illegal demonstration. 
D. Hartigan, a police officer, disguises himself as an elderly homeowner as part of a police "sting" operation aimed at unscrupulous home repair operations. Drew, president and sole proprietor of Drew's Home Repairs, inspects the home that he believes belongs to Hartigan. Drew believes Hartigan is the homeowner and a senior citizen with failing mental powers. Drew's inspection of the home reveals the only plumbing problem to be a 25 -cent washer that needs replacing. Drew tells Hartigan that the plumbing in the house is in terrible shape, and that city building inspectors are likely to condemn the home if plumbing repairs are not made immediately. Drew offers Hartigan a contract to perform all required plumbing repairs for $ 10,000$. Drew emphasizes that this is a "rock bottom price with a $20 \%$ senior citizen discount." Drew is arrested and charged with attempted theft by false pretenses. 
Answer: B
Question: Trent was on trial for the statutory rape of Vanessa. He denied that she was even in his company on the night of the alleged offense, when he was working as the night clerk at a convenience store. The prosecution offers to have Warren testify that, in a phone conversation on the evening in question, Vanessa said, "I have to run; Trent wants me to stop by the store tonight while he's working." The defense objects to the proposed testimony. Should the court allow Warren's testimony?

Options:
A. Yes, as a present sense impression of Vanessa's.
B. Yes, as evidence that Vanessa was in Trent's company that night.
C. No, unless Vanessa is unavailable as a witness.
D. No, because Vanessa's state of mind is not in issue.
Answer: B
Question: Dan, an experienced trial lawyer, traveled from his hometown, Secondville, to Capitol City, where he was hired to complete a complex antitrust case that Dan estimated would take weeks, and possibly months, to complete. During his sojourn in Capitol City, which began on a Sunday, Dan stayed at the Capitol City Ryott Hotel. The normal room charges were $ 150$ per night. Dan made a deal with the hotel management to pay $ 700$ per week for his room for an indefinite period. Dan never told the hotel management exactly how long he planned to stay, but each Sunday he would present the cashier with a check for $ 700$, plus any additional taxes and room charges, to pay for the previous week's lodging. Dan was not asked to pay in this manner, but he did it as a matter of custom. Dan did this for four weeks, and then the opposing party suddenly made a generous settlement offer which Dan's client agreed to accept. On a Thursday morning, before checkout time for that day, Dan tendered the hotel cashier a check for $ 400$ plus additional charges incurred from Sunday through Wednesday nights. The cashier promptly took the check and then told Dan, "You owe us $ 1,000$ plus taxes for 10 more days' lodging. We expect you to pay for the rest of this week as you customarily do, and then for an additional week because you didn't give us a week's notice that you planned to vacate." Dan refused to pay the additional charges. If the hotel sues Dan and the court determines that the parties created a tenancy, for how many additional days' lodging will he be required to pay?

Options:
A. None, because a tenancy at will was created.
B. Three days, because a periodic tenancy was created.
C. Seven days, because a periodic tenancy was created.
D. Ten days, because a periodic tenancy was created. 
Answer: D
Question: Publectric Company, a utility supplying gas and electricity to West Howard, was working on some of its underground lines. Access to the underground lines was through a utility hole, which Publectric had left uncovered. Publectric installed a modern guardrail around the hole to prevent members of the public from falling into the hole. Although the rail completely surrounded the utility hole, there was an opening in one part of the railing which made it easier to pass down tools to those working below. Hound, a dog fancier, lived in a single-family home across the street from where the Publectric utility hole was located. Hound owned "Hobson's Hotspur of Trent,"' a champion springer spaniel whom Hound exhibited at dog shows. The dog was also a family pet and was known affectionately to Hound's family as "Hobby." Hound's home had a large front lawn where Hound often walked Hobby without first leashing him. One such afternoon, Hobby saw a squirrel and suddenly bolted away from Hound's lawn. Hobby dashed across the street, passed through the opening of the guardrail, and fell into the utility hole, suffering broken bones and internal injuries. Although expensive and lengthy care by veterinary specialists saved Hobby's life, the dog was no longer of "show quality" after the injuries. Assume that the jurisdiction in which West Howard is located still recognizes all the common law defenses to tort liability. Can Hound recover his economic losses resulting from the injuries to Hobby in a suit against Publectric?

Options:
A. No, unless Publectric failed to exercise reasonable care in making the dangerous condition safe.
B. No, if the guardrail used by Publectric meets typical industry standards.
C. No, because the dog escaped from Hound's yard. 
D. No, unless a reasonably careful person would have been injured in the same manner.
Answer: A
Question: An act of Congress provides for the payment of Social Security benefits to the disabled children of deceased workers. A complex set of regulations carefully defines the meaning of the term "disabled." The benefits are payable even after the child reaches his or her age of majority, but terminate automatically when the recipient marries, unless the recipient marries a person who is also disabled, in which case the Social Security payments continue. Dorit has been disabled since birth, and her father died in a coal mine cave-in when Dorit was 14 years of age. She has received Social Security benefits since her father's death. However, at age 25, Dorit married Jack, who is not disabled, and her Social Security benefits were summarily terminated. She files suit in federal district court, seeking to compel the government to restore her benefits. She asserts, among other things, that there is no logical reason why she should be deprived of benefits when unmarried disabled persons and disabled persons who marry other disabled persons continue to receive them. Which of the following is the strongest ground to defend the constitutionality of the federal statute in question?

Options:
A. Congress's power over federal expenditures is plenary, and Congress has discretion to spend money from the Federal Treasury in whatever way it wishes.
B. Because there is no constitutional entitlement to Social Security payments, Congress is free to condition them as it sees fit.
C. The classification imposed by this statute is reasonable, inasmuch as it will save the national government a substantial amount of money.
D. Congress could rationally conclude that a disabled child of a deceased worker who is unmarried or who marries another disabled person is more likely to be needy than a disabled person who is married to a person who is not disabled.
Answer: D
Question: Oswald owned an old, unoccupied, and extremely run-down building in Hooverville. The walls were unstable and beginning to buckle. Oswald knew of the building's condition, but he did not want to spend the money needed to repair it and hoped that the Hooverville Redevelopment Commission would want his land to build a shopping mall. Timmy was a driver for U-Pump-It Tanker Lines, a concern that operated tanker trucks that delivered gasoline to filling stations. U-PumpIt's rules required drivers to park only in legally designated parking areas. After completing his deliveries for the day in Hooverville, Timmy stopped for a cup of coffee. He did not want to spend time trying to find a parking place on a side street, so he parked in front of Oswald's building, which was located on a through street. The area in front of Oswald's building was clearly marked, "No Parking At Any Time." Timmy walked to the Emporium Restaurant, where he ordered coffee and the daily special. Hooverville was located in an area subject to minor earthquake activity. Just as Timmy began his lunch, a quake jolted Hooverville. The quake was not strong enough to cause damage to structurally sound buildings, but was sufficient to cause the walls of Oswald's building to collapse. The building fell on top of the U-Pump-It truck, causing the truck to roll over on its side. Gasoline leaked from the truck and began streaming down the street. Elvira, a pedestrian walking two blocks away, lit a cigarette and casually tossed a match in the street. The stream of gasoline had just reached that street and the match caused the gasoline to ignite. The flames spread to a nearby commercial building. An explosion occurred, causing many windows in a neighboring apartment building to be blown inward. Flying glass was propelled into Bonnie's apartment. Bonnie suffered multiple cuts and a serious eye injury from the flying glass. Bonnie brings a negligence action against UPump-It Tanker Lines. If the court finds in favor of U-Pump-It, it will be because: 

Options:
A. The court follows the Cardozo view regarding foreseeable plaintiffs.
B. Timmy was acting outside the scope of his employment when Bonnie was injured.
C. Oswald was the legal cause of Bonnie's injuries because his building was in an unreasonably dangerous condition.
D. The company had a rule against illegal parking on streets.
Answer: A
Question: In which of the following situations is the offered evidence most likely to be admitted? 

Options:
A. In Paula's action against David for assault, David offers the testimony of Walter, a surprise witness who, it was just discovered, witnessed the altercation between Paula and David; when questioned by the judge, David's counsel agrees to permit a continuance following Walter's testimony so that Paula will have time to prepare for cross-examination of Walter.
B. In Peter's negligence action against Dolores arising from an accident in which a 1994 Camaro struck Peter while he crossed Main Street at a crosswalk, Peter offers the testimony of Winchell, the owner of a garage, who will state that Dolores arranged to have the brakes of the subject 1994 Camaro relined and adjusted the day after the accident; Dolores stipulated in her responsive pleadings that she was the owner of the 1994 Camaro.
C. In Patrick's action for personal injuries against Don arising from a collision between the two while both rode in a bicycle race, Patrick offers a videotape showing a surgeon resetting his broken leg, in which it was necessary to rebreak the leg while Patrick was anesthetized.
D. In Penelope's defamation action against Delbert, Penelope offers the testimony of Wanda, who will state that when she heard Delbert describe Penelope as "the biggest shyster in Middleville," she understood him to mean that Penelope was an incompetent lawyer; Wanda is the eleventh person Penelope has called to interpret the quoted statement.
Answer: A
Question: The legislature of State Red recently enacted a statute that defined first degree murder as murder with premeditation and deliberation, or a homicide in the commission of arson, rape, robbery, burglary, or kidnapping. The statute defined second degree murder as all other murder at common law. In which of the following situations is defendant most likely to be guilty of first degree murder?

Options:
A. Believing that his neighbor, Paul, had stolen his lawn mower, defendant walked over to his neighbor's house and punched him in the nose, intending to injure him. As a result of the blow, Paul fell back, hit his head, and died.
B. After leaving a bar in a highly intoxicated state, defendant attempted to drive home. While so doing, he struck Oscar, who was legally crossing the street in a marked crosswalk. Oscar died instantly.
C. Infuriated over having caught Mary having an affair with defendant's husband, defendant bought a shotgun and shot and killed Mary as she was leaving her house on her way to work.
D. Immediately after being punched by Betty, defendant in a rage took a knife and stabbed and killed Betty.
Answer: C
Question: Owens owned Goldacre in fee simple. In 1985, Owens executed a deed conveying Goldacre "to Private School for the life of my wife Wilma, and then to my children, their heirs and assigns, in equal share, provided, however, that School shall use the premises for educational purposes only." School then erected a temporary building on Goldacre and conducted certain classes within the building. In 2000 , one of School's former students informed the principal of School that a geological survey of the area had indicated that there were valuable minerals beneath the surface of Goldacre. School, badly in need of money, granted to Mine Co. a right to remove the minerals from a one-acre portion of Goldacre upon the payment of a percentage of the value of the minerals removed. From 2000 to 2004, Mine Co. conducted mining operations on the one-acre portion of Goldacre. School had continued to conduct classes in the temporary building located on Goldacre. In 2004, while Owens and Wilma were still alive, both of Owens's children filed suit against School and Mine Co. seeking damages for the removal of minerals since 2000 , an injunction preventing further acts of removal, and all other appropriate remedies. Which of the following would be the most likely result?

Options:
A. School and Mine Co. should be enjoined, and damages should be recovered, but impounded for future distribution.
B. The children should succeed, because the interest of School terminated with the first removal of minerals from Goldacre. 
C. The injunction should be granted, but damages should be denied because Owens and Wilma are not parties to the action.
D. Damages should be awarded, but the injunction should be denied.
Answer: A
Question: Olman expected the value of property near Middletown to increase substantially. To buy a tract known as Blueacre, Olman secured a $ 10,000$ mortgage on Blueacre from Exbank. After completing the purchase, Olman wished to make certain improvements on Blueacre. To finance them, Olman took out a $ 2,000$ second mortgage on Blueacre from Wybank. Both mortgages were promptly and properly recorded. Before Olman made a payment on either mortgage, the federal government announced that it would begin storing nuclear waste products in the Middletown area. The value of property, including Blueacre, plummeted. Olman did not pay either Exbank or Wybank. Exbank brought a proper action to foreclose, notifying both Olman and Wybank. Purch bought Blueacre at the foreclosure sale for $ 6,000$, the property's fair market value. Assuming there are no special statutes in the jurisdiction regarding deficiency judgments, Olman owes:

Options:
A. $ 5,000$ to Exbank and $ 1,000$ to Wybank.
B. $ 4,000$ to Exbank and $ 2,000$ to Wybank.
C. Nothing to Exbank and $ 2,000$ to Wybank.
D. $4,000 to Exbank and nothing to Wybank. 
Answer: B
Question: On Halloween night, Darryl, who is 12 years old, dressed up as a bandit by wearing dark clothes and a pair of panty hose over his head and went trick or treating. Darryl carried a toy gun that looked like a real firearm. Darryl's method of operation was to go up to a house and ring the bell. When the person answered, he pointed his toy gun at the person's face and said, "Your money or your life," and then shouted, "Trick or treat!" At the fifth house he went to, Darryl began his routine, but before he could say "trick or treat," Patty, the elderly homeowner, screamed and slammed the door in Darryl's face. Still shaken by the experience, Patty suffered a heart attack five minutes later. Has Patty a cause of action against Darryl?

Options:
A. Yes, for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
B. Yes, for assault.
C. No, because Darryl is only 12 years old.
D. No, because Patty should have known that the gun was a toy since it was Halloween.
Answer: D
Question: Manfred recently moved from an apartment to a house with a large yard. Fortunately, Manfred worked as a checkout clerk at Gardenshop, a nursery and garden supply concern, and was eligible for a discount on a lawn mower. Lately, he had been eyeing a fancy new model of power mower, but even with his discount, it was out of reach. When Manfred's neighbors began complaining about his yard, Manfred decided that he would simply take his dream mower. Gardenshop had so many, they would never miss it, he reasoned. The next day, he took a mower from the Garden Equipment Department and hid it behind some crates on the loading dock. He planned to take the mower home with him that night because he was scheduled to close the business for that day. At the end of the day, however, Manfred became afraid that he would be caught. He returned the mower to the Garden Equipment Department and went home as usual. Manfred has most likely committed:

Options:
A. Larceny.
B. Attempted larceny.
C. Embezzlement.
D. No crime.
Answer: A
Question: Which of the following would the court be least likely to take judicial notice of?

Options:
A. The birthdate of the plaintiff's son is June $14,1974$.
B. The defendant has filed 25 frivolous lawsuits in the same court in which the case is being tried.
C. It rained in the city in which the parties reside on March 28, 1987.
D. Independence Day is July 4, and it is a state holiday.
Answer: A
Question: Paul sues Daniel for personal injuries that Paul suffered as a result of a battery committed on Paul by Daniel. Daniel's defense is that it is all a case of mistaken identity. Daniel admits that Paul was beaten up, but claims he had nothing to do with Paul's injuries. At trial, Daniel testified in his own behalf that on the date that Paul suffered his injuries, Daniel was on an extended vacation in England, 2,000 miles away from the place where the battery occurred. Paul's attorney did not cross-examine Daniel regarding that testimony. In rebuttal, Paul's attorney calls Walter, who is willing to testify that one week after Paul suffered his injuries, Daniel said to Walter, "I haven't been out of the country in five years." Walter's testimony is:

Options:
A. Admissible as a statement against interest by Daniel.
B. Admissible as a prior inconsistent statement of Daniel.
C. Admissible as an admission by Daniel.
D. Inadmissible, because Daniel was not given an opportunity to comment on the statement prior to Walter's testimony.
Answer: C
Question: Which of the following plaintiffs has/have standing to sue in federal court? I. Jane Pease files suit on behalf of herself and taxpayers nationwide to challenge the federal government's spending so much money on military weaponry instead of using the funds for social programs. II. The "Save Our Wildlife" group files suit to block further oil drilling in the nation because such drilling is contrary to the public's interest in preserving wildlife. III. The "End Nuclear Power Now Society" files suit challenging a state law that requires disclosure of the Society's membership, alleging that the law infringes on its members' freedom of association. IV. Luigi Vercotti files suit to challenge exclusionary zoning practices by Carson City, alleging that the challenged zoning made it too expensive for him to buy a home in Carson City.

Options:
A. I. only.
B. II. and III. only.
C. III. only.
D. III. and IV. only.
Answer: C
Question: Strobe, the owner of Goldacre, decided to sell her property and move to another state. She told her friends to "spread the word" that she wished to sell. After one week, Strobe received in the mail a written offer, signed by Briggs, to purchase Goldacre for $ 50,000$. The written offer was legally sufficient to form a written contract for the sale of Goldacre. Strobe called Briggs and said that the offer was acceptable, but that she did not want to sign it at that time because she wanted to "make sure the paper was legal." The next day Strobe visited her attorney, gave him the written offer from Briggs, and asked him to prepare a formal contract for the sale of Goldacre on the same terms and conditions as those in the written offer. When the attorney had finished, Strobe signed the contract prepared by her attorney and mailed it to Briggs. Later that day, before Briggs had received the contract, Norris called Strobe and offered to buy Goldacre for $ 60,000$, which Strobe accepted immediately over the phone. Strobe called Briggs and told him that she had received a higher offer from Norris that she had accepted. Strobe then signed a written contract to sell Goldacre to Norris. When Norris received the contract he signed it and then promptly and properly recorded it, and sent Strobe the specified down payment. Briggs received the written contract from Strobe the next day. The recording statute in the jurisdiction provides: Any conveyance of an interest in land, other than a lease for less than one year, shall not be valid against a subsequent purchaser for value, without notice thereof, whose conveyance is first recorded. In an appropriate action brought by Briggs against Strobe and Norris for specific performance and to quiet title, Briggs will:

Options:
A. Win, because the written offer satisfies the Statute of Frauds.
B. Win, because the contract of sale satisfied the Statute of Frauds. 
C. Lose, because he never entered into a binding contract with Strobe.
D. Lose, because the recording statute protects Norris.
Answer: D
Question: The state of North Pacific contains major deposits of natural gas. In an effort to support this industry, and at the same time save its citizens substantial sums for the cost of heating their homes and businesses, the legislature enacted a substantial tax on out-of-state suppliers of natural gas. In addition, the state required state licensed public utilities to buy no less than $75 \%$ of their natural gas needs from sources within the state as long as their needs could be met. Muni-Power, an out-of-state supplier, brought suit against North Pacific challenging this statute. The best constitutional argument Muni-Power could make is that the statute violates:

Options:
A. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
B. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
C. The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV.
D. The Commerce Clause.
Answer: D