ncoop57/mmmlu huggingface dataset:
Congress passes an act requiring that all owners of bicycles in the United States register them with a federal bicycle registry. The purpose of the law is to provide reliable evidence of ownership to reduce bicycle theft. No fee is charged for the registration. Although most stolen bicycles are kept or resold by the thieves in the same cities in which the bicycles were stolen, an increasing number of bicycles are being taken to cities in other states for resale. Is this act of Congress constitutional?
A. Yes, because Congress has the power to regulate property for the general welfare. 
B. Yes, because Congress could determine that in inseverable aggregates bicycle thefts affect interstate commerce. 
C. No, because most stolen bicycles remain within the state in which they were stolen. 
D. No, because the registration of vehicles is a matter reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment
Answer: B
Donaldson broke into Professor Ruiz's office in order to look at examination questions. The questions were locked in a drawer, and Donaldson could not find them. Donaldson believed that looking at examination questions was a crime, but in this belief he was mistaken. Charged with burglary, Donaldson should be
A. acquitted, because he did not complete the crime and he has not been charged with attempt. 
B. acquitted, because what he intended to do when he broke in was not a crime. 
C. convicted, because he had the necessary mental state and committed the act of breaking and entering. 
D. convicted, because factual impossibility is not a defense
Answer: B
A statute of the state of Lanape flatly bans the sale or distribution of contraceptive devices to minors. Drugs, Inc., a national retailer of drugs and related items, is charged with violating the Lanape statute. Which of the following is the strongest constitutional argument Drugs, Inc., could make in defending itself against prosecution for violation of this statute?
A. The statute constitutes an undue burden on interstate commerce.
B. The statute denies minors one of their fundamental rights without due process.
C. The statute denies Drugs, Inc., a privilege or immunity of state citizenship. 
D. The statute violates the First Amendment right to freedom of religion because it regulates morals.
Answer: B
In a tort action, Fisher testified against Dawes. Dawes then called Jones, who testified that Fisher had a bad reputation for veracity. Dawes then also called Weld to testify that Fisher once perpetrated a hoax on the police. Weld's testimony is
A. admissible, provided that the hoax involved untruthfulness. 
B. admissible, provided that the hoax resulted in conviction of Fisher. 
C. inadmissible, because it is merely cumulative impeachment. 
D. inadmissible, because it is extrinsic evidence of a specific instance of misconduc
Answer: D
Astin left her car at Garrison's Garage to have repair work done. After completing the repairs, Garrison took the car out for a test drive and was involved in an accident that caused damages to Placek. A statute imposes liability on the owner of an automobile for injuries to a third party that are caused by the negligence of any person driving the automobile with the owner's consent. The statute applies to situations of this kind, even if the owner did not specifically authorize the mechanic to test drive the car. Placek sued Astin and Garrison jointly for damages arising from the accident. In that action, Astin crossclaims to recover from Garrison the amount of any payment Astin may be required to make to Placek. The trier of fact has determined that the accident was caused solely by negligent driving on Garrison's part, and that Placek's damages were $100,000. In this action, the proper outcome will be that
A. Placek should have judgment for $50,000 each against Astin and Garrison; Astin should recover nothing from Garrison. 
B. Placek should have judgment for $100,000 against Garrison only. 
C. Placek should have judgment for $100,000 against Astin and Garrison jointly, and Astin should have judgment against Garrison for 50 percent of any amount collected from Astin by Placek. 
D. Placek should have judgment for $100,000 against Astin and Garrison jointly, and Astin should have judgment against Garrison for any amount collected from Astin by Placek.
Answer: D
Martinez, a widower, owns in fee simple a ranch, Ranchacre. Martinez has one child, Enrique, who is married. Enrique has one child, Ana Maria, who is also married but has no children. In an effort to dispose of Ranchacre to his descendants and to honor a request by Ana Maria that she be skipped in any disposition, Martinez conveys Ranchacre to his son, Enrique, for life with the remainder to Ana Maria's children in fee simple. What interest, if any, is created in favor of Ana Maria's unborn children at the time of the conveyance?
A. A contingent remainder.
B. A vested remainder subject to divestment.
C. A springing use.
D. None.
Answer: A
On June 1, Kravat, a manufacturer of men's neckties, received the following order from Clothier: "Ship 500 two-inch ties, assorted stripes, your catalogue No. V34. Delivery by July l." On June 1, Kravat shipped 500 three-inch ties that arrived at Clothier's place of business on June 3. Clothier immediately telegraphed Kravat: "Reject your shipment. Order was for two-inch ties." Clothier, however, did not ship the ties back to Kravat. Kravat replied by telegram: "Will deliver proper ties before July 1." Clothier received this telegram on June 4, but did not reply to it. On June 30, Kravat tendered 500 two-inch ties in assorted stripes, designated in his catalogue as item No. V34; but Clothier refused to accept them.Did Clothier properly reject the ties delivered on June 3?
A. Yes, because the ties were nonconforming goods. 
B. Yes, because Kravat did not notify Clothier that the ties were shipped as an accommodation to Clothier. 
C. No, because Kravat could accept Clothier's offer by prompt shipment of either conforming or nonconforming goods. 
D. No, because Clothier waived his right to reject the ties by not returning them promptly to Kravat.
Answer: A
On June 1, Kravat, a manufacturer of men's neckties, received the following order from Clothier: "Ship 500 two-inch ties, assorted stripes, your catalogue No. V34. Delivery by July l." On June 1, Kravat shipped 500 three-inch ties that arrived at Clothier's place of business on June 3. Clothier immediately telegraphed Kravat: "Reject your shipment. Order was for two-inch ties." Clothier, however, did not ship the ties back to Kravat. Kravat replied by telegram: "Will deliver proper ties before July 1." Clothier received this telegram on June 4, but did not reply to it. On June 30, Kravat tendered 500 two-inch ties in assorted stripes, designated in his catalogue as item No. V34; but Clothier refused to accept them.Did Clothier properly reject the ties tendered on June 30?
A. Yes, because Kravat's shipping the threeinch ties on June 1 was a present breach of contract. 
B. Yes, because Kravat's shipping the threeinch ties on June 1 was an anticipatory repudiation. 
C. No, because Kravat cured the June 1 defective delivery by his tender of conforming goods on June 30. 
D. No, because a contract for the sale of goods can be modified without consideration
Answer: C
Dent, while eating in a restaurant, noticed that a departing customer at the next table had left a five-dollar bill as a tip for the waitress. Dent reached over, picked up the five-dollar bill, and put it in his pocket. As he stood up to leave, another customer who had seen him take the money ran over to him and hit him in the face with her umbrella. Enraged, Dent choked the customer to death. Dent is charged with murder. He requests an instruction allowing the jury to find him guilty of voluntary manslaughter rather than murder. Dent's request should be
A. granted, because the jury could find that Dent acted recklessly and not with the intent to cause death or serious bodily harm. 
B. granted, because the jury could find that being hit in the face with an umbrella constitutes adequate provocation. 
C. denied, because the evidence shows that Dent intended to kill or to cause serious bodily harm. 
D. denied, because the evidence shows that Dent provoked the assault on himself by his criminal misconduct
Answer: B
Dever drove his car into an intersection and collided with a fire engine that had entered the intersection from Dever's right. The accident was caused by negligence on Dever's part. As a result of the accident, the fire engine was delayed in reaching Peters' house, which was entirely consumed by fire. Peters' house was located about ten blocks from the scene of the accident. If Peters asserts a claim against Dever, Peters will recover
A. the part of his loss that would have been prevented if the collision had not occurred.
B. the value of his house before the fire.
C. nothing if Dever had nothing to do with causing the fire.
D. nothing, because Dever's conduct did not create an apparent danger to Peters
Answer: A
Miller applied to the state liquor board for transfer of the license of Miller's Bar and Grill to a new site. The board held a hearing on the application. At that hearing, Hammond appeared without being subpoenaed and stated that Miller had underworld connections. Although Hammond did not know this information to be true, he had heard rumors about Miller's character and had noticed several underworld figures going in and out of Miller's Bar and Grill. In fact, Miller had no underworld connections. In a claim against Hammond based on defamation, Miller will
A. not recover if Hammond reasonably believed his statement to be true.
B. not recover if the board granted Miller's application.
C. recover, because Hammond's statement was false. 
D. recover, because Hammond appeared before the board voluntarily
Answer: A
Santos agreed to sell and Perrine agreed to buy a described lot on which a single-family residence had been built. Under the contract, Santos agreed to convey marketable title subject only to conditions, covenants, and restrictions of record and all applicable zoning laws and ordinances. The lot was subject to a 10-foot sideline setback originally set forth in the developer's duly recorded subdivision plot. The applicable zoning ordinance zones the property for single-family units and requires an 8.5-foot sideline setback. Prior to closing, a survey of the property was made. It revealed that a portion of Santos's house was 8.4 feet from the sideline. Perrine refused to consummate the transaction on the ground that Santos's title is not marketable. In an appropriate action, Santos seeks specific performance. Who will prevail in such an action?
A. Santos, because any suit against Perrine concerning the setback would be frivolous. 
B. Santos, because the setback violation falls within the doctrine de minimis non curat lex. 
C. Perrine, because any variation, however small, amounts to a breach of contract. 
D. Perrine, because the fact that Perrine may be exposed to litigation is sufficient to make the title unmarketable
Answer: D
Young, believing that Brown suffered from arthritis, told her that for $100 he could cure her with a device he had invented. The device was a large box with a series of electric light bulbs along the sides. Brown, after examining the device, agreed to take the treatment, which consisted of placing her hands inside the box for several ten-minute periods. Brown gave Young $100 and went through the treatment. Young is charged with obtaining money by false pretenses. Each of the following, if true, will absolve Young of guilt for obtaining money by false pretenses EXCEPT:
A. Young honestly believed that the device would cure arthritis, but his belief was unreasonable. 
B. Brown honestly believed that the device would cure arthritis, but her belief was unreasonable. 
C. Young was playing a practical joke on Brown and intended to return the money.
D. Brown was an undercover police officer and did not believe that the device would cure arthritis.
Answer: B
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?
A. The commerce clause of Article I, Â§ 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, Â§ 3
Answer: D
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?
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 objec
Answer: A
Opus, the owner of Stoneacre, entered into a written agreement with Miner. Under this written agreement, which was acknowledged and duly recorded, Miner, for a five-year period, was given the privilege to enter on Stoneacre to remove sand, gravel, and stone in whatever quantities Miner desired. Miner was to make monthly payments to Opus on the basis of the amount of sand, gravel, and stone removed during the previous month. Under the terms of the agreement, Miner's privilege was exclusive against all others except Opus, who reserved the right to use Stoneacre to any purpose whatsoever, including the removal of sand, gravel, and stone. One year after the agreement was entered into, the state brought a condemnation action to take Stoneacre for a highway interchange. In the condemnation action, is Miner entitled to compensation?
A. Yes, because he has a license, which is a property right protected by the due process clause. 
B. Yes, because he has a profit Ã  prendre, which is a property right protected by the due process clause. 
C. No, because he has a license, and licenses are not property rights protected by the due process clause. 
D. No, because he has a profit Ã  prendre, which is not a property right protected by the due process clause.
Answer: B
Dan was an alcoholic who frequently experienced auditory hallucinations that commanded him to engage in bizarre and sometimes violent behavior. He generally obeyed these commands. The hallucinations appeared more frequently when he was intoxicated, but he sometimes experienced them when he had not been drinking. After Dan had been drinking continuously for a three-day period, an elderly woman began to reproach him about his drunken condition, slapping him on the face and shoulders as she did so. Dan believed that he was being unmercifully attacked and heard the hallucinatory voice telling him to strangle his assailant. He did so, and the woman died. If Dan is charged with second-degree murder, Dan's best chance of acquittal would be to rely on a defense of
A. intoxication.
B. lack of malice aforethought.
C. self-defense.
D. insanity
Answer: D
Mater, a wealthy widow, wishing to make a substantial and potentially enduring gift to her beloved adult stepson Prodigal, established with Vault Savings and Loan Association a passbook savings account by an initial deposit of $10,000.For this question only, assume the following facts. The passbook was issued solely in Prodigal's name; but Mater retained possession of it and Prodigal was not then informed of the savings account. Subsequently, Mater became disgusted with Prodigal's behavior and decided to give the same savings account solely to her beloved adult daughter Distaff. As permitted by the rules of Vault Savings and Loan, Mater effected this change by agreement with Vault. This time she left possession of the passbook with Vault. Shortly thereafter, Prodigal learned of the original savings account in his name and the subsequent switch to Distaff's name. If Prodigal now sues Vault Savings and Loan for $10,000 plus accrued interest, will the action succeed?
A. Yes, because Prodigal was a third-party intended beneficiary of the original MaterVault deposit agreement. 
B. Yes, because Prodigal was a constructive assignee of Mater's claim, as depositor, to the savings account. 
C. No, because Prodigal never obtained possession of the passbook. 
D. No, because Prodigal's right, if any, to the funds on deposit was effectively abrogated by the second Mater-Vault deposit agreement
Answer: D
Mater, a wealthy widow, wishing to make a substantial and potentially enduring gift to her beloved adult stepson Prodigal, established with Vault Savings and Loan Association a passbook savings account by an initial deposit of $10,000."For this question only, assume the following facts. The passbook was issued by Vault to Mater solely in her own name. That same day, disinterested witnesses being present, she handed the passbook to Prodigal and said, "As a token of my love and affection for you, I give you this $10,000 savings account." Shortly thereafter, she changed her mind and wrote Prodigal, "I hereby revoke my gift to you of the $10,000 savings account with Vault Savings and Loan Association. Please return my passbook immediately. Signed: Mater." Prodigal received the letter but ignored it, and Mater died unexpectedly a few days later. In litigation between Prodigal and Mater's estate, which of the following is a correct statement of the parties' rights with respect to the money on deposit with Vault?
A. The estate prevails, because Mater's gift to Prodigal was revocable and was terminated by her death. 
B. The estate prevails, because Mater's gift to Prodigal was revocable and was terminated by her express revocation. 
C. Prodigal prevails, because he took Mater's claim to the savings account by a gratuitous but effective and irrevocable assignment from Mater. 
D. Prodigal prevails, because his failure to reject the gift, even if the assignment was revocable, created an estoppel against Mater and her estate
Answer: C
In a civil suit by Pine against Decker, Decker called Wall, a chemist, as an expert witness and asked him a number of questions about his education and experience in chemistry. Over Pine's objection that Wall was not shown to be qualified in chemistry, the trial court permitted Wall to testify as to his opinion in response to a hypothetical question. On cross-examination, Pine asked Wall if he had failed two chemistry courses while doing his graduate work. The answer should be
A. admitted, because it is relevant to the weight to be given to Wall's testimony. 
B. admitted, because specific acts bearing on truthfulness may be inquired about on cross-examination. 
C. excluded, because the court has determined that Wall is qualified to testify as an expert. 
D. excluded, because Wall's character has not been put in issue
Answer: A
Congress enacts a law providing that all disagreements between the United States and a state over federal grant-in-aid funds shall be settled by the filing of a suit in the federal district court in the affected state. "The judgment of that federal court shall be transmitted to the head of the federal agency dispensing such funds who, if satisfied that the judgment is fair and lawful, shall execute the judgment according to its terms." This law is
A. constitutional, because disagreements over federal grant-in-aid funds necessarily involve federal questions within the judicial power of the United States. 
B. constitutional, because the spending of federal monies necessarily includes the authority to provide for the effective settlement of disputes involving them. 
C. unconstitutional, because it vests authority in the federal court to determine a matter prohibited to it by the Eleventh Amendment. 
D. unconstitutional, because it vests authority in a federal court to render an advisory opinion
Answer: D
Purvis purchased a used car from Daley, a used car dealer. Knowing that they were false, Daley made the following statements to Purvis prior to the sale: Statement 1. This car has never been involved in an accident. Statement 2. This car gets 25 miles to the gallon on the open highway. Statement 3. This is as smooth-riding a car as you can get. If Purvis asserts a claim against Daley based on deceit, which of the false statements made by Daley would support Purvis' claim?
A. Statement 1 only.
B. Statement 2 only.
C. Statements 1 and 2 only.
D. Statements 2 and 3 onl
Answer: C
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:
A. A non-expert 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 be if it was authentic, and that has no suspicious circumstances surrounding it 
D. A witness testifies that Drake admitted that the signature is his.
Answer: A
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?
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
James and Mary Green were walking to their car one evening after having seen a movie. As they were passing a dark alleyway, Daves leaped out brandishing a gun. He pushed Mary against the wall of a nearby building, held the gun to her head, and demanded money from James. James handed over his cash. Daves grabbed the cash and ran away. Which of the following, listed in descending order of seriousness, is the most serious crime for which Daves may be convicted?
A. Robbery from James Green.
B. Larceny from James Green.
C. Assault on James and Mary Green.
D. Assault on Mary Green
Answer: A
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. 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
Answer: D