ncoop57/mmmlu huggingface dataset:
Light Company is the sole distributor of electrical power in City. The Company owns and maintains all of the electric poles and equipment in City. Light Company has complied with the National Electrical Safety Code, which establishes minimum requirements for the installation and maintenance of power poles. The Code has been approved by the federal and state governments. Light Company has had to replace insulators on its poles repeatedly because unknown persons repeatedly shoot at and destroy them. This causes the power lines to fall to the ground. On one of these occasions, Paul, Faber's fiveyear-old son, wandered out of Faber's yard, intentionally touched a downed wire, and was seriously burned. If a claim on Paul's behalf is asserted against Light Company, the probable result is that Paul will
A. recover if Light Company could have taken reasonable steps to prevent the lines from falling when the insulators were destroyed.
B. recover, because a supplier of electricity is strictly liable in tort. 
C. not recover unless Light Company failed to exercise reasonable care to stop the destruction of the insulators.
D. not recover, because the destruction of the insulators was intentional
Answer: A
The city of Metropolis has an ordinance that makes it an offense, punishable by fine, for the owner of a dog to permit the dog to run unleashed on a public way. Smythe, a police officer, observed a small dog running loose in the street. As Smythe picked the dog up, Nelson, who was seated in her car lawfully parked at the curb, called out, "Oh, thank you, Officer, for returning Fido." Smythe asked Nelson whether the dog was hers, and when she acknowledged ownership, he asked to see her driver's license. Nelson gave her name and address, but she refused to produce a driver's license. Smythe then told her to produce her driver's license if she did not want to go to jail. Nelson responded by saying, "Isn't this ridiculous?" Smythe took her by the arm and said, "Let's go. You are under arrest." Nelson cried out that Smythe was hurting her but he refused to release her arm, and she struck him with her free hand. Smythe then dragged Nelson from her car, forced her into his squad car, and took her to the police station. The incident took place on the street in front of the apartment where Nelson and her aged father, Joplin, lived. Smythe did not know that Joplin had observed what took place from a window in the apartment. If Nelson's father, Joplin, asserts a claim against Smythe for the intentional infliction of emotional distress, will Joplin prevail?
A. Yes, if Smythe's acts caused Joplin severe emotional distress. 
B. Yes, if it is found that Smythe's behavior was extreme and outrageous with respect to Nelson. 
C. No, because Smythe did not know that Joplin was watching. 
D. No, because Joplin was not within the zone of physical danger
Answer: C
Davison was driving through an apartment building area plagued with an unusually high incidence of burglaries and assaults. Acting pursuant to a police department plan to combat crime by the random stopping of automobiles in the area between midnight and 6 a.m., a police officer stopped Davison and asked him for identification. As Davison handed the officer his license, the officer directed a flashlight into the automobile and saw what appeared to be the barrel of a shotgun protruding from under the front seat on the passenger side of the car. The office ordered Davison from the car, searched him, and discovered marijuana cigarettes and a shotgun. At Davison's trial for unlawful possession of narcotics, his motion to suppress the use of the marijuana as evidence should be
A. sustained, because the marijuana was discovered as a result of the unlawful stopping of Davison's automobile. 
B. sustained, because the use of the flashlight constituted a search of the interior of Davison's automobile without probable cause. 
C. denied, because the officer's conduct was consistent with the established police plan. 
D. denied, because the discovery of the gun in plain view created the reasonable suspicion necessary to justify the arrest and search of Daviso
Answer: A
Morgan conveyed Greenacre, her one-family residence, to "Perez for life, remainder to Rowan, her heirs and assigns, subject, however, to First Bank's mortgage thereon." There was an unpaid balance on the mortgage of $10,000, which is payable in $1,000 annual installments plus interest at six percent on the unpaid balance, with the next payment due on July 1. Perez is now occupying Greenacre. The reasonable rental value of the property exceeds the sum necessary to meet all current charges. There is no applicable statute. Under the rules governing contributions between life tenants and remaindermen, how should the burden for payment be allocated?
A. Rowan must pay the principal payment, but Perez must pay the interest to First Bank. 
B. Rowan must pay both the principal and interest payments to First Bank.
C. Perez must pay both the principal and interest payments to First Bank.
D. Perez must pay the principal payment, but Rowan must pay the interest to First Bank
Answer: A
Anders conveyed her only parcel of land to Burton by a duly executed and delivered warranty deed, which provided: To have and to hold the described tract of land in fee simple, subject to the understanding that within one year from the date of the instrument said grantee shall construct and thereafter maintain and operate on said premises a public health center. The grantee, Burton, constructed a public health center on the tract within the time specified and operated it for five years. At the end of this period, Burton converted the structure into a senior citizens' recreational facility. It is conceded by all parties in interest that a senior citizens' recreational facility is not a public health center. In an appropriate action, Anders seeks a declaration that the change in the use of the facility has caused the land and structure to revert to her. In this action, Anders should
A. win, because the language of the deed created a determinable fee, which leaves a possibility of reverter in the grantor. 
B. win, because the language of the deed created a fee subject to condition subsequent, which leaves a right of entry or power of termination in the grantor. 
C. lose, because the language of the deed created only a contractual obligation and did not provide for retention of property interest by the grantor. 
D. lose, because an equitable charge is enforceable only in equity
Answer: C
A group of children, ranging in age from 8 to 15, regularly played football on the common area of an apartment complex owned by O'Neill. Most of the children lived in the apartment complex, but some lived elsewhere. O'Neill knew that the children played on the common area and had not objected. Peter, a 13-year-old who did not live in the apartment complex, fell over a sprinkler head while running for a pass and broke his leg. Although Peter had played football on the common area before, he had never noticed the sprinkler heads, which protruded one inch above the ground and were part of a permanently installed underground sprinkler system. If a claim is asserted on Peter's behalf, Peter will
A. prevail if the sprinkler head was a hazard that Peter probably would not discover.
B. prevail, because O'Neill had not objected to children playing on the common area. 87 
C. not prevail, because Peter did not live in the apartment complex. 
D. not prevail unless the sprinkler heads were abnormally dangerous to users of the common area
Answer: A
Congress passes a law regulating the wholesale retail prices of "every purchase or sale of oil, natural gas, and electric power made in the United States." The strongest argument in support of the constitutionality of this statute is that
A. the Constitution expressly empowers Congress to enact laws for "the general welfare." 
B. Congress has the authority to regulate such products' interstate transportation and importation from abroad.
C. Congress may regulate the prices of every purchase and sale of goods and services made in this country, because commerce includes buying and selling. 
D. in inseverable aggregates, the domestic purchases or sales of such products affect interstate or foreign commerce
Answer: D
In a written contract, Singer agreed to deliver to Byer 500 described chairs at $20 each F.O.B. Singer's place of business. The contract provided that "neither party will assign this contract without the written consent of the other." Singer placed the chairs on board a carrier on January 30. On February 1 Singer said in a signed writing, "I hereby assign to Wheeler all my rights under the Singer-Byer contract." Singer did not request and did not get Byer's consent to this transaction. On February 2 the chairs were destroyed while in transit in a derailment of the carrier's railroad car. ". In an action by Wheeler against Byer, Wheeler probably will recover
A. $10,000, the contract price. 
B. the difference between the contract price and the market value of the chairs.
C. nothing, because the chairs had not been delivered. 
D. nothing, because the Singer-Byer contract forbade an assignment
Answer: A
In a written contract, Singer agreed to deliver to Byer 500 described chairs at $20 each F.O.B. Singer's place of business. The contract provided that "neither party will assign this contract without the written consent of the other." Singer placed the chairs on board a carrier on January 30. On February 1 Singer said in a signed writing, "I hereby assign to Wheeler all my rights under the Singer-Byer contract." Singer did not request and did not get Byer's consent to this transaction. On February 2 the chairs were destroyed while in transit in a derailment of the carrier's railroad car. "In an action by Byer against Singer for breach of contract, Byer probably will
A. succeed, because the carrier will be deemed to be Singer's agent. 
B. succeed, because the risk of loss was on Singer. 
C. not succeed, because of impossibility of performance. 
D. not succeed, because the risk of loss was on Byer
Answer: D
Dutton, disappointed by his eight-year-old son's failure to do well in school, began systematically depriving the child of food during summer vacation. Although his son became seriously ill from malnutrition, Dutton failed to call a doctor. He believed that as a parent he had the sole right to determine whether the child was fed or received medical treatment. Eventually the child died. An autopsy disclosed that the child had suffered agonizingly as a result of the starvation, that a physician's aid would have alleviated the suffering, and that although the child would have died in a few months from malnutrition, the actual cause of death was an untreatable form of cancer. The father was prosecuted for murder, defined in the jurisdiction as "unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought." The father should be
A. acquitted, because of the defendant's good faith belief concerning parental rights in supervising children. 
B. acquitted, because summoning the physician or feeding the child would not have prevented the child's death from cancer. 
C. convicted, because the father's treatment of his son showed reckless indifference to the value of life. 
D. convicted, because the child would have died from malnutrition had he not been afflicted with cancer.
Answer: B
Vance had cheated Dodd in a card game. Angered, Dodd set out for Vance's house with the intention of shooting him. Just as he was about to set foot on Vance's property, Dodd was arrested by a police officer who noticed that Dodd was carrying a revolver. A statute in the jurisdiction makes it a crime to "enter the property of another with the intent to commit any crime of violence thereon." 88 If charged with attempting to violate the statute, Dodd should be found
A. not guilty, because the statute defines an attempted crime and there cannot be an attempt to attempt. 
B. not guilty, because to convict him would be to punish him simply for having a guilty mind. 
C. guilty, because he was close enough to entering the property and he had the necessary state of mind. 
D. guilty, because this is a statute designed to protect the public from violence and Dodd was dangerous
Answer: C
Congress enacted a statute providing that persons may challenge a state energy law on the ground that it is in conflict with the federal Constitution in either federal or state court. According to this federal statute, any decision by a lower state court upholding a state energy law against a challenge based on the federal Constitution may be appealed directly to the United States Supreme Court. The provisions of this statute that authorize direct United States Supreme Court review of specified decisions rendered by lower state courts are
A. constitutional, because congressional control over questions of energy usage is plenary. 
B. constitutional, because Congress may establish the manner in which the appellate jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court is exercised. 
C. unconstitutional, because they infringe on the sovereign right of states to have their supreme courts review decisions of their lower state courts. 
D. unconstitutional, because under Article III of the U.S. Constitution the United States Supreme Court does not have authority to review directly decisions of lower state courts.
Answer: B
After several days of negotiations, Ohner wrote to Plummer: "Will pay you $3,000 if you will install new plumbing in my office building according to the specifications I have sent you. I must have your reply by March 30." Plummer replied by a letter that Ohner received on March 15: "Will not do it for less than $3,500." On March 20, Plummer wrote to Ohner: "Have changed my mind. I will do the work for $3,000. Unless I hear from you to the contrary, I will begin work on April 5." Ohner received this letter on March 22 but did not reply to it. Plummer, without Ohner's knowledge, began the work on April 5. Which of the following best characterizes the legal relationship between Ohner and Plummer as of April 5?
A. A contract was formed on March 20 when Plummer posted his letter.
B. A contract was formed on March 22 when Ohner received Plummer's letter.
C. A contract was formed on April 5 when Plummer began work.
D. There was no contract between the parties as of April 5.
Answer: D
On January 15, in a signed writing, Artisan agreed to remodel Ohner's building according to certain specifications, and Ohner agreed to pay the specified price of $5,000 to Artisan's niece, Roberta Neese, as a birthday present. Neese did not learn of the agreement until her birthday on May 5. Before they signed the writing, Artisan and Ohner had orally agreed that their "written agreement will be null and void unless Ohner is able to obtain a $5,000 loan from the First National Bank before January 31.""For this question only, assume that Ohner was unable to obtain the loan, and on January 31, phoned Artisan and told him, "Don't begin the work. The deal is off." In an action for breach of contract brought against Ohner by the proper party, will Ohner be successful in asserting as a defense his inability to obtain a loan?
A. Yes, because obtaining a loan was a condition precedent to the existence of an enforceable contract. 
B. Yes, because the agreement about obtaining a loan is a modification of a construction contract and is not required to be in writing. 
C. No, because the agreement about obtaining a loan contradicts the express and implied terms of the writing. 
D. No, because Ohner is estopped to deny the validity of the written agreement
Answer: A
On January 15, in a signed writing, Artisan agreed to remodel Ohner's building according to certain specifications, and Ohner agreed to pay the specified price of $5,000 to Artisan's niece, Roberta Neese, as a birthday present. Neese did not learn of the agreement until her birthday on May 5. Before they signed the writing, Artisan and Ohner had orally agreed that their "written agreement will be null and void unless Ohner is able to obtain a $5,000 loan from the First National Bank before January 31."For this question only, assume that Ohner obtained the loan, that Artisan completed the remodeling on May 1, and that on May 3, at Artisan's request, Ohner paid the $5,000 to Artisan. If Neese learns of Ohner's payment to Artisan on May 5, at the same time she learns of the written Artisan-Ohner contract, will she succeed in action against Ohner for $5,000?
A. Yes, because she is an intended beneficiary of the written Artisan-Ohner contract. 
B. Yes, because the written Artisan-Ohner contract operated as an assignment to Neese, and Artisan thereby lost whatever rights he may have had to the $5,000. 
C. No, because Neese had not furnished any consideration to support Ohner's promise to pay $5,000 to her. 
D. No, because on May 3, Artisan and Ohner effectively modified their written contract, thereby depriving Neese of whatever right she may have had under that contract.
Answer: D
Dryden is on trial on a charge of driving while intoxicated. When Dryden was booked at the police station, a videotape was made that showed him unsteady, abusive, and speaking in a slurred manner. If the prosecutor lays a foundation properly identifying the tape, should the court admit it in evidence and permit it to be shown to the jury?
A. Yes, because it is an admission. 
B. Yes, because its value is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. 
C. No, because the privilege against selfincrimination is applicable. 
D. No, because specific instances of conduct cannot be proved by extrinsic evidence
Answer: B
Talbot and Rogers, as lessees, signed a valid lease for a house. Lane, the landlord, duly executed the lease and delivered possession of the premises to the lessees. During the term of the lease, Rogers verbally invited Andrews to share the house with the lessees. Andrews agreed to pay part of the rent to Lane, who did not object to this arrangement, despite a provision in the lease that provided that "any assignment, subletting, or transfer of any rights under this lease without the express written consent of the landlord is strictly prohibited, null, and void." Talbot objected to Andrews's moving in, even if Andrews were to pay a part of the rent. When Andrews moved in, Talbot brought an appropriate action against Lane, Rogers, and Andrews for a declaratory judgment that Rogers had no right to assign. Rogers' defense was that he and Talbot were tenants in common of a term for years, and that he, Rogers, had a right to assign a fractional interest in his undivided onehalf interest. In this action, Talbot will
A. prevail, because a cotenant has no right to assign all or any part of a leasehold without the consent of all interested parties. 
B. prevail, because the lease provision prohibits assignment. 
C. not prevail, because he is not the beneficiary of the nonassignment provision in the lease. 
D. not prevail, because his claim amounts to a void restraint on alienation
Answer: C
The owner of Newacre executed and delivered to a power company a right-of-way deed for the building and maintenance of an overhead power line across Newacre. The deed was properly recorded. Newacre then passed through several intermediate conveyances until it was conveyed to Sloan about 10 years after the date of the right-of-way deed. All the intermediate deeds were properly recorded, but none of them mentioned the right-of-way. Sloan entered into a written contract to sell Newacre to Jones. By the terms of the contract, Sloan promised to furnish an abstract of title to Jones. Sloan contracted directly with Abstract Company to prepare and deliver an abstract to Jones, and Abstract Company did so. The abstract omitted the right-of-way deed. Jones delivered the abstract to his attorney and asked the attorney for an opinion as to title. The attorney signed and delivered to Jones a letter stating that, from the attorney's examination of the abstract, it was his "opinion that Sloan had a free and unencumbered marketable title to Newacre." Sloan conveyed Newacre to Jones by a deed which included covenants of general warranty and against encumbrances. Jones paid the full purchase price. After Jones had been in possession of Newacre for 90 more than a year, he learned about the right-of-way deed. Sloan, Jones, Abstract Company, and Jones's attorney were all without actual knowledge of the existence of the right-of-way at the time of the conveyance from Sloan to Jones."If Jones sues Abstract Company for damages caused to Jones by the presence of the right-ofway, the most likely result will be a decision for
A. Jones, because Jones was a third-party creditor beneficiary of the contract between Sloan and Abstract Company. 
B. Jones, because the abstract prepared by Abstract Company constitutes a guarantee of Jones's title to Newacre. 
C. Abstract Company, because Abstract Company had no knowledge of the existence of the right-of-way. 
D. Abstract Company, because there was no showing that any fraud was practiced upon Jones
Answer: A
The owner of Newacre executed and delivered to a power company a right-of-way deed for the building and maintenance of an overhead power line across Newacre. The deed was properly recorded. Newacre then passed through several intermediate conveyances until it was conveyed to Sloan about 10 years after the date of the right-of-way deed. All the intermediate deeds were properly recorded, but none of them mentioned the right-of-way. Sloan entered into a written contract to sell Newacre to Jones. By the terms of the contract, Sloan promised to furnish an abstract of title to Jones. Sloan contracted directly with Abstract Company to prepare and deliver an abstract to Jones, and Abstract Company did so. The abstract omitted the right-of-way deed. Jones delivered the abstract to his attorney and asked the attorney for an opinion as to title. The attorney signed and delivered to Jones a letter stating that, from the attorney's examination of the abstract, it was his "opinion that Sloan had a free and unencumbered marketable title to Newacre." Sloan conveyed Newacre to Jones by a deed which included covenants of general warranty and against encumbrances. Jones paid the full purchase price. After Jones had been in possession of Newacre for 90 more than a year, he learned about the right-of-way deed. Sloan, Jones, Abstract Company, and Jones's attorney were all without actual knowledge of the existence of the right-of-way at the time of the conveyance from Sloan to Jones."If Jones sues Sloan because of the presence of the right-of-way, the most likely result will be a decision for
A. Jones, because Sloan is liable for his negligent misrepresentation. 
B. Jones, because the covenants in Sloan's deed to Jones have been breached. 
C. Sloan, because Jones relied upon Abstract Company, not Sloan, for information concerning title. 
D. Sloan, because Sloan was without knowledge of any defects in the title to Newacre
Answer: B
Congress enacts a criminal statute prohibiting "any person from interfering in any way with any right conferred on another person by the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Application of this statute to Jones, a private citizen, would be most clearly constitutional if Jones, with threats of violence, coerces
A. a public school teacher to exclude AfricanAmerican pupils from her class, solely because of their race. 
B. African-American pupils, solely because of their race, to refrain from attending a privately owned and operated school licensed by the state. 
C. the bus driver operating a free school bus service under the sponsorship of a local church to refuse to allow AfricanAmerican pupils on the bus, solely because of their race. 
D. the federal official in charge of distributing certain federal benefits directly to students from distributing them to African-American pupils, solely because of their race
Answer: A