ncoop57/mmmlu huggingface dataset:
Ben was the illegitimate, unacknowledged child of Fred. Fred died intestate, leaving neither spouse nor any children other than Ben. The state's law of intestate succession provides that an unacknowledged illegitimate child may not inherit his father's property. The spouse, all other blood relations, and the state are preferred as heirs over the unacknowledged illegitimate child. Ben filed suit in an appropriate court alleging that the state statute barring an illegitimate child from sharing in a parent's estate is invalid, and that he should be declared lawful heir to his father's estate"In challenging the validity of the state statute, Ben's strongest argument would be that
A. there is no rational basis for preferring as heirs collateral relatives and even the state over unacknowledged children, and therefore the law violates the equal protection clause. 
B. he has been deprived of property without due process because his fundamental right to inherit has been compromised without a compelling state need.
C. it violates the privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
D. it is a denial of procedural due process because it does not give the unacknowledged illegitimate child an opportunity to prove paternity
Answer: A
Ben was the illegitimate, unacknowledged child of Fred. Fred died intestate, leaving neither spouse nor any children other than Ben. The state's law of intestate succession provides that an unacknowledged illegitimate child may not inherit his father's property. The spouse, all other blood relations, and the state are preferred as heirs over the unacknowledged illegitimate child. Ben filed suit in an appropriate court alleging that the state statute barring an illegitimate child from sharing in a parent's estate is invalid, and that he should be declared lawful heir to his father's estate"The state's strongest defense of the statute would be that
A. the authority of a state over the disposition of decedents' property located in the state is not affected by the Constitution of the United States
B. a statute prescribing the means of disposing of the property of intestate decedents does not constitute invidious discrimination.
C. inheritance under intestate succession laws is a privilege, not a right, and therefore is not protected as property under the due process clause. 
D. its interest in promoting family life and in encouraging the formal acknowledgment of paternity gives the law a rational basis.
Answer: D
Alice conveyed Twinoaks Farm "to Barbara, her heirs and assigns, so long as the premises are used for residential and farm purposes, then to Charles and his heirs and assigns." The jurisdiction in which Twinoaks Farm is located has adopted the common law Rule Against Perpetuities unmodified by statute. As a consequence of the conveyance, Alice's interest in Twinoaks Farm is 
A. nothing.
B. a possibility of reverter.
C. a right of entry for condition broken.
D. a reversion in fee simple absolute
Answer: B
Storekeeper, the owner of a large hardware store, sells power saws for both personal and commercial use. He often takes old power saws as trade-ins on new ones. The old power saws are then completely disassembled and rebuilt with new bearings by Storekeeper's employees and sold by Storekeeper as "reconditioned saws." Purchaser, the owner and operator of a cabinetmaking shop, informed Storekeeper that he wanted to buy a reconditioned circular saw for use in his cabinetmaking business. However, the blade that was on the saw he picked out had very coarse teeth for cutting rough lumber. Purchaser told Storekeeper that he wanted a saw blade that would cut plywood. Storekeeper exchanged the coarse blade for a new one with finer teeth that would cut plywood smoothly. The new blade was manufactured by Saw-Blade Company, which uses all available techniques to inspect its products for defects. The reconditioned saw had been manufactured by Power Saw Company. The week after the saw was purchased, Employee, who works for Purchaser in Purchaser's cabinetmaking shop, was injured while using the saw. Employee's arm was severely cut. As a result, the cabinetmaking shop was shut down for a week until a replacement for Employee could be foundIf Employee was injured while cutting plywood because the shaft holding the saw blade came loose when a bearing gave way and the shaft and blade flew off the saw, and if Employee asserts a claim based on strict liability in tort against Power Saw Company, Employee will probably
A. recover if the shaft that came loose was a part of the saw when it was new.
B. recover, because Power Saw Company was in the business of manufacturing dangerous machines. 
C. not recover, because Employee was not the buyer of the power saw. 
D. not recover, because the saw had been rebuilt by Storekeepe
Answer: D
Storekeeper, the owner of a large hardware store, sells power saws for both personal and commercial use. He often takes old power saws as trade-ins on new ones. The old power saws are then completely disassembled and rebuilt with new bearings by Storekeeper's employees and sold by Storekeeper as "reconditioned saws." Purchaser, the owner and operator of a cabinetmaking shop, informed Storekeeper that he wanted to buy a reconditioned circular saw for use in his cabinetmaking business. However, the blade that was on the saw he picked out had very coarse teeth for cutting rough lumber. Purchaser told Storekeeper that he wanted a saw blade that would cut plywood. Storekeeper exchanged the coarse blade for a new one with finer teeth that would cut plywood smoothly. The new blade was manufactured by Saw-Blade Company, which uses all available techniques to inspect its products for defects. The reconditioned saw had been manufactured by Power Saw Company. The week after the saw was purchased, Employee, who works for Purchaser in Purchaser's cabinetmaking shop, was injured while using the saw. Employee's arm was severely cut. As a result, the cabinetmaking shop was shut down for a week until a replacement for Employee could be foundIf Employee was injured while cutting plywood because the shaft holding the saw blade came loose when a bearing gave way and the shaft and blade flew off the saw, and if Purchaser asserts a claim based on strict liability in tort against Storekeeper for loss of business because of the injury to Employee, Purchaser probably will
A. not recover, because economic loss from injury to an employee is not within the scope of Storekeeper's duty. 
B. not recover, because Storekeeper was not the manufacturer of the power saw. 
C. recover, because Storekeeper knew that the power saw was to be used in Purchaser's cabinetmaking business. 
D. recover, because the reconditioned power saw was the direct cause of Purchaser's loss of business
Answer: A
Storekeeper, the owner of a large hardware store, sells power saws for both personal and commercial use. He often takes old power saws as trade-ins on new ones. The old power saws are then completely disassembled and rebuilt with new bearings by Storekeeper's employees and sold by Storekeeper as "reconditioned saws." Purchaser, the owner and operator of a cabinetmaking shop, informed Storekeeper that he wanted to buy a reconditioned circular saw for use in his cabinetmaking business. However, the blade that was on the saw he picked out had very coarse teeth for cutting rough lumber. Purchaser told Storekeeper that he wanted a saw blade that would cut plywood. Storekeeper exchanged the coarse blade for a new one with finer teeth that would cut plywood smoothly. The new blade was manufactured by Saw-Blade Company, which uses all available techniques to inspect its products for defects. The reconditioned saw had been manufactured by Power Saw Company. The week after the saw was purchased, Employee, who works for Purchaser in Purchaser's cabinetmaking shop, was injured while using the saw. Employee's arm was severely cut. As a result, the cabinetmaking shop was shut down for a week until a replacement for Employee could be foundIf Employee was injured while cutting plywood because the shaft holding the saw blade came loose when a bearing gave way and the shaft and blade flew off the saw, and if Employee asserts a claim based on strict liability in tort against Storekeeper, Employee probably will
A. not recover unless Purchaser told Storekeeper that Employee would use the power saw.
B. not recover if Employee failed to notice that the shaft was coming loose.
C. recover unless Employee knew that the shaft was coming loose.
D. recover unless Storekeeper used all possible care in reconditioning the power saw
Answer: C
Storekeeper, the owner of a large hardware store, sells power saws for both personal and commercial use. He often takes old power saws as trade-ins on new ones. The old power saws are then completely disassembled and rebuilt with new bearings by Storekeeper's employees and sold by Storekeeper as "reconditioned saws." Purchaser, the owner and operator of a cabinetmaking shop, informed Storekeeper that he wanted to buy a reconditioned circular saw for use in his cabinetmaking business. However, the blade that was on the saw he picked out had very coarse teeth for cutting rough lumber. Purchaser told Storekeeper that he wanted a saw blade that would cut plywood. Storekeeper exchanged the coarse blade for a new one with finer teeth that would cut plywood smoothly. The new blade was manufactured by Saw-Blade Company, which uses all available techniques to inspect its products for defects. The reconditioned saw had been manufactured by Power Saw Company. The week after the saw was purchased, Employee, who works for Purchaser in Purchaser's cabinetmaking shop, was injured while using the saw. Employee's arm was severely cut. As a result, the cabinetmaking shop was shut down for a week until a replacement for Employee could be foundIf Employee was cutting a sheet of plywood, and while he was doing so, the saw blade flew to pieces and severely cut Employee's arm, and if Employee asserts a claim against Storekeeper, the theory on which Employee is most likely to prevail is
A. strict liability in tort.
B. express warranty.
C. negligence, relying on res ipsa loquitur. 
D. negligence, relying on the sale of an inherently dangerous produc
Answer: A
Storekeeper, the owner of a large hardware store, sells power saws for both personal and commercial use. He often takes old power saws as trade-ins on new ones. The old power saws are then completely disassembled and rebuilt with new bearings by Storekeeper's employees and sold by Storekeeper as "reconditioned saws." Purchaser, the owner and operator of a cabinetmaking shop, informed Storekeeper that he wanted to buy a reconditioned circular saw for use in his cabinetmaking business. However, the blade that was on the saw he picked out had very coarse teeth for cutting rough lumber. Purchaser told Storekeeper that he wanted a saw blade that would cut plywood. Storekeeper exchanged the coarse blade for a new one with finer teeth that would cut plywood smoothly. The new blade was manufactured by Saw-Blade Company, which uses all available techniques to inspect its products for defects. The reconditioned saw had been manufactured by Power Saw Company. The week after the saw was purchased, Employee, who works for Purchaser in Purchaser's cabinetmaking shop, was injured while using the saw. Employee's arm was severely cut. As a result, the cabinetmaking shop was shut down for a week until a replacement for Employee could be foundIf Employee was cutting a sheet of hard plastic, and while he was doing so, the saw blade flew to pieces and severely cut Employee's arm, and if Employee asserts a claim based on strict liability in tort against Saw-Blade Company, the defense most likely to prevail is
A. Employee did not purchase the saw blade.
B. the blade was being put to an improper use.
C. Employee was contributorily negligent in using the blade to cut hard plastic.
D. Saw-Blade Company used every available means to inspect the blade for defects.
Answer: B
In which of the following situations is Defendant most likely to be guilty of common law murder?
A. Angered because his neighbor is having a noisy party, Defendant fires a rifle into the neighbor's house. The bullet strikes and kills a guest at the party. 
B. During an argument, Harry slaps Defendant. Angered, Defendant responds by shooting and killing Harry. 
C. Defendant drives his car through a red light and strikes and kills a pedestrian who is crossing the street.
D. Using his fist, Defendant punches Walter in the face. As a result of the blow, Walter falls and hits his head on a concrete curb, suffers a concussion, and dies
Answer: A
Miller is tried for armed robbery of the First Bank of City.The prosecution, in its case in chief, offers evidence that when Miller was arrested one day after the crime, he had a quantity of heroin and a hypodermic needle in his possession. This evidence should be
A. admitted to prove Miller's motive to commit the crime.
B. admitted to prove Miller's propensity to commit crimes.
C. excluded, because its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. 
D. excluded, because such evidence may be offered only to rebut evidence of good character offered by a defendan
Answer: C
Miller is tried for armed robbery of the First Bank of City.. The prosecutor offers the testimony of a bartender who will say that when he saw the money in Miller's wallet, he said, "You must have robbed a bank," to which Miller made no reply. This evidence is
A. admissible to prove that Miller's conduct caused the bartender to believe that Miller robbed the bank.
B. admissible as a statement made in the presence of the defendant.
C. inadmissible, because it would violate Miller's privilege against selfincrimination. 
D. inadmissible, because Miller had no reason to respond to the bartender's statement.
Answer: D
Miller is tried for armed robbery of the First Bank of City.At the request of police, the teller who was robbed prepared a sketch bearing a strong likeness to Miller, but the teller died in an automobile accident before Miller was arrested. At trial the prosecution offers the sketch. The sketch is
A. admissible as an identification of a person after perceiving him.
B. admissible as past recollection recorded.
C. inadmissible as hearsay, not within any exception. 
D. inadmissible as an opinion of the teller
Answer: C
Miller is tried for armed robbery of the First Bank of City.Miller testified on direct examination that he had never been in the First Bank of City. His counsel asked, "What, if anything, did you tell the police when you were arrested?" If his answer was "I told them I had never been in the bank," this answer would be
A. admissible to prove that Miller had never been in the bank.
B. admissible as a prior consistent statement.
C. inadmissible as hearsay, not within any exception. 
D. inadmissible, because it was a self-serving statement by a person with a substantial motive to fabricate
Answer: C
Miller is tried for armed robbery of the First Bank of City.On cross-examination of Miller, the prosecutor asks Miller whether he was convicted the previous year of tax fraud. This question is
A. proper to show that Miller is inclined to lie.
B. proper to show that Miller is inclined to steal money.
C. improper, because the conviction has insufficient similarity to the crime charged. 
D. improper, because the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice
Answer: A
In an effort to relieve serious and persistent unemployment in the industrialized state of Onondaga, its legislature enacted a statute requiring every business with annual sales in Onondaga of over one million dollars to purchase goods and/or services in Onondaga equal in value to at least half of the annual sales in Onondaga of the business. Which of the following constitutional provisions is the strongest basis on which to attack this statute?
A. The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
B. The equal protection clause.
C. The commerce clause.
D. The privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
Answer: C
Tess occupied an apartment in a building owned by Len. She paid rent of $125 in advance each month. During the second month of occupancy, Tess organized the tenants in the building as a tenants' association and the association made demands of Len concerning certain repairs and improvements the tenants wanted. When Tess tendered rent for the third month, Len notified her that rent for the fourth and subsequent months would be $200 per month. Tess protested and pointed out that all other tenants paid rent of $125 per month. Thereupon, Len gave the required statutory notice that the tenancy was being terminated at the end of the third month. By an appropriate proceeding, Tess contests Len's right to terminate. If Tess succeeds, it will be because
A. a periodic tenancy was created by implication.
B. the doctrine prohibiting retaliatory eviction is part of the law of the jurisdiction.
C. the $200 rent demanded violates the agreement implied by the rate charged to other tenants.
D. the law implies a term of one year in the absence of any express agreement
Answer: B
Meadowview is a large tract of undeveloped land. Black, the owner of Meadowview, prepared a development plan creating 200 house lots in Meadowview with the necessary streets and public areas. The plan was fully approved by all necessary governmental agencies and duly recorded. However, construction of the streets, utilities, and other aspects of the development of Meadowview has not yet begun, and none of the streets can be opened as public ways until they are completed in accordance with the applicable ordinances of the municipality in which Meadowview is located. College Avenue, one of the streets laid out as part of the Meadowview development, abuts Whiteacre, an adjacent one-acre parcel owned by White. Whiteacre has no access to any public way except an old, poorly developed road which is inconvenient and cannot be used without great expense. White sold Whiteacre to Breyer. The description used in the deed from White to Breyer was the same as that used in prior deeds except that the portion of the description which formerly said, "thence by land of Black, northeasterly a distance of 200 feet, more or less," was changed to "thence by College Avenue as laid out on the Plan of Meadowview North 46, East 201.6 feet," with full reference to the plan and its recording data. Breyer now seeks a building permit which will show that Breyer intends to use College Avenue for access to Whiteacre. Black objects to the granting of a building permit on the grounds that he has never granted any right to White or Breyer to use College Avenue. There are no governing statutes or ordinances relating to the problem. Black brings an appropriate action in which the right of Breyer to use College Avenue without an express grant from Black is at issue."The best argument for Black in this action is that
A. Breyer's right must await the action of appropriate public authorities to open College Avenue as a public street, since no private easements arose by implication. 
B. the Statute of Frauds prevents the introduction of evidence which might prove the necessity for Breyer to use College Avenue.
C. Breyer's right to use College Avenue is restricted to the assertion of a way by necessity and the facts preclude the success of such a claim.
D. Breyer would be unjustly enriched if he were permitted to use College Avenue
Answer: A
John Doe, the owner of a milk container manufacturing firm, sought to focus public attention on the milk packaging law of the State of Clinton in order to have it repealed. On a weekday at 12 noon, he delivered an excited, animated, and loud harangue on the steps of the State Capitol in front of the main entryway. An audience of 200 onlookers, who gathered on the steps, heckled him and laughed as he delivered his tirade. Doe repeatedly stated, gesturing expressively and making faces, that "the g ddamned milk packaging law is stupid," and that "I will strangle every one of those g ddamned legislators I can get hold of because this law they created proves they are all too dumb to live." After about 15 minutes, Doe stopped speaking, and the amused crowd dispersed. There are three relevant statutes of the State of Clinton. The first statute prohibits "all speech making, picketing, and public gatherings of every sort on the Capitol steps in front of the main entryway during the hours of 7:45 a.m. 8:15 a.m., 11:45 a.m. 12:15 p.m., 12:45 p.m. 1:15 p.m., and 4:45 p.m. 5:15 p.m. on Capitol working days.""If Doe is prosecuted under the "Capitol steps" statute and defends on constitutional grounds, which of the following best describes the proper burden of proof?
A. Doe would have to prove that the state did not have a rational basis for enacting this statute.
B. Doe would have to prove that the state did not have a compelling need for this statute or that it had less restrictive means by which it could satisfy that need.
C. The state would have to prove that it had a rational basis for enacting this statute.
D. The state would have to prove that it had a compelling need for this statute and that there were no less restrictive means by which it could satisfy that need
Answer: D
John Doe, the owner of a milk container manufacturing firm, sought to focus public attention on the milk packaging law of the State of Clinton in order to have it repealed. On a weekday at 12 noon, he delivered an excited, animated, and loud harangue on the steps of the State Capitol in front of the main entryway. An audience of 200 onlookers, who gathered on the steps, heckled him and laughed as he delivered his tirade. Doe repeatedly stated, gesturing expressively and making faces, that "the g ddamned milk packaging law is stupid," and that "I will strangle every one of those g ddamned legislators I can get hold of because this law they created proves they are all too dumb to live." After about 15 minutes, Doe stopped speaking, and the amused crowd dispersed. There are three relevant statutes of the State of Clinton. The first statute prohibits "all speech making, picketing, and public gatherings of every sort on the Capitol steps in front of the main entryway during the hours of 7:45 a.m. 8:15 a.m., 11:45 a.m. 12:15 p.m., 12:45 p.m. 1:15 p.m., and 4:45 p.m. 5:15 p.m. on Capitol working days.""Which of the following possible plaintiffs other than Doe would be most likely to obtain an adjudication in a federal court on the validity of the "Capitol steps" statute?
A. A state taxpayer in the highest tax bracket.
B. A politician intending to make a campaign speech on the Capitol steps during a prohibited time.
C. A legislator who voted against the statute because he thought it unconstitutional.
D. An organization whose purpose was "to seek judicial invalidation of unconstitutional laws."
Answer: B