ncoop57/mmmlu huggingface dataset:
A state statute requires that all buses which operate as common carriers on the highways of the state shall be equipped with seat belts for passengers. Transport Lines, an interstate carrier, challenges the validity of the statute and the right of the state to make the requirement. What is the best basis for a constitutional challenge by Transport Lines?
A. Violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
B. Violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
C. Unreasonable burden on interstate commerce.
D. Difficulty of enforcement
Answer: C
Amy Docent, a state college instructor, was discharged because of her refusal to comply with a state statute requiring public employees to swear or affirm that they will (1) "uphold and defend" the state and federal constitutions and (2) "oppose the overthrow" of the state or federal government "by force, violence, or any improper method." The statute had previously been held constitutional by the state supreme court. Docent filed a complaint in federal district court alleging the unconstitutionality of the statute and seeking an injunction and damages. Which of the following is the state's strongest argument for sustaining the validity of the statute?
A. Government employment is a privilege, not a right. 
B. The oath as a whole is only a commitment to abide by constitutional processes.
C. The First and Fourteenth Amendments permit a state to fix the conditions of state employment.
D. The state has a compelling need to keep disloyal persons out of governmental positions of trust
Answer: B
All lawyers practicing in the state of Erewhon must be members of the State Bar Association, by order of the state supreme court. Several state officials serve on the Bar Association's Board of Bar Governors. The Board of Bar Governors authorizes the payment of dues for two staff members to the Cosmopolitan Club, a private dining club licensed to sell alcoholic beverages. The Cosmopolitan Club is frequented by affluent businessmen and professionals and by legislators. It is generally known that the purpose of the membership of the Bar Association staff is to enable them to go where members of the "elite" meet and to lobby for legislation in which the Bar Association is interested. The State Bar Association has numerous committees and subcommittees concerned with family law, real estate law, unauthorized practice, etc., and its recommendations often influence state policy. Some committee meetings are held at the Cosmopolitan Club. The club is known to have rules which restrict membership by race, religion, and sex. Plaintiffs, husband and wife, who are members of the Erewhon Bar Association, petitioned the Board of Bar Governors to adopt a resolution prohibiting the payment of club dues to and the holding of meetings of the Bar Association or its committees at places which discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or sex. After substantial public discussion, the Board of Bar Governors, by a close vote, failed to pass such a resolution. These events received extensive coverage in the local newspapers. Plaintiffs have brought an action in federal court seeking an injunction against such payments and the holding of meetings in such places as the Cosmopolitan Club."The strongest argument for Plaintiffs is
A. private rights to discriminate and associate freely must defer to a public interest against discrimination on the basis of race, religion, or sex. 
B. the failure of the State Bar Association to pass a resolution forbidding discrimination on the basis of race, religion, or sex constitutes a denial of equal protection. 
C. the State Bar Association is an agency of the state and its payment of dues to such private clubs promotes discrimination on the basis of race, religion, and sex. 
D. the State Bar Association's payment of dues to such private clubs promotes discrimination on the basis of race, religion, and se
Answer: C
All lawyers practicing in the state of Erewhon must be members of the State Bar Association, by order of the state supreme court. Several state officials serve on the Bar Association's Board of Bar Governors. The Board of Bar Governors authorizes the payment of dues for two staff members to the Cosmopolitan Club, a private dining club licensed to sell alcoholic beverages. The Cosmopolitan Club is frequented by affluent businessmen and professionals and by legislators. It is generally known that the purpose of the membership of the Bar Association staff is to enable them to go where members of the "elite" meet and to lobby for legislation in which the Bar Association is interested. The State Bar Association has numerous committees and subcommittees concerned with family law, real estate law, unauthorized practice, etc., and its recommendations often influence state policy. Some committee meetings are held at the Cosmopolitan Club. The club is known to have rules which restrict membership by race, religion, and sex. Plaintiffs, husband and wife, who are members of the Erewhon Bar Association, petitioned the Board of Bar Governors to adopt a resolution prohibiting the payment of club dues to and the holding of meetings of the Bar Association or its committees at places which discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or sex. After substantial public discussion, the Board of Bar Governors, by a close vote, failed to pass such a resolution. These events received extensive coverage in the local newspapers. Plaintiffs have brought an action in federal court seeking an injunction against such payments and the holding of meetings in such places as the Cosmopolitan Club."Which of the following actions should a federal district court take with respect to jurisdiction?
A. Hear the case on the merits, because a federal claim is presented. 
B. Hear the case on the merits, because the expenditure of state funds in support of segregation is forbidden by the Fifth Amendment. 
C. Abstain from jurisdiction, because the constitutional issue should be litigated first in a state court. 
D. Dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction, because the issue of Bar Association activities is solely within the domain of state law
Answer: A
In 1945, Owen, owner of both Blackacre and Whiteacre, executed and delivered two separate deeds by which he conveyed the two tracts of land as follows: Blackacre was conveyed "To Alpha and his heirs as long as it is used exclusively for residential purposes, but if it is ever used for other than residential purposes, to the American Red Cross." Whiteacre was conveyed "To Beta and her heirs as long as it is used exclusively for residential purposes, but if it is used for other than residential purposes prior to 1965, then to the Salvation Army." In 1950, Owen died leaving a valid will by which he devised all his real estate to his brother, Bill. The will had no residuary clause. Owen was survived by Bill and by Owen's daughter, Delia, who was Owen's sole heir. For the purpose of this set of questions, it may be assumed that the common law rule against perpetuities applies in the state where the land is located and that the state also has a statute providing that "all future estates and interests are alienable, descendible, and devisable in the same manner as possessory estates and interests.""In 1955, Alpha and Delia entered into a contract with John whereby Alpha and Delia contracted to sell Blackacre to John in fee simple. After examining the title, John refused to perform on the ground that Alpha and Delia could not give good title. Alpha and Delia joined in an action against John for specific performance. Specific performance will be
A. ordered, because Alpha and Delia together own a fee simple absolute in Blackacre. 
B. ordered, because Alpha alone owns the entire fee simple in Blackacre. 
C. denied, because Bill has a valid interest in Blackacre. 
D. denied, because the American Red Cross has a valid interest in Blackacre.
Answer: C
In 1945, Owen, owner of both Blackacre and Whiteacre, executed and delivered two separate deeds by which he conveyed the two tracts of land as follows: Blackacre was conveyed "To Alpha and his heirs as long as it is used exclusively for residential purposes, but if it is ever used for other than residential purposes, to the American Red Cross." Whiteacre was conveyed "To Beta and her heirs as long as it is used exclusively for residential purposes, but if it is used for other than residential purposes prior to 1965, then to the Salvation Army." In 1950, Owen died leaving a valid will by which he devised all his real estate to his brother, Bill. The will had no residuary clause. Owen was survived by Bill and by Owen's daughter, Delia, who was Owen's sole heir. For the purpose of this set of questions, it may be assumed that the common law rule against perpetuities applies in the state where the land is located and that the state also has a statute providing that "all future estates and interests are alienable, descendible, and devisable in the same manner as possessory estates and interests."""In 1946, the interest of the American Red Cross in Blackacre could be best described as a
A. valid contingent remainder.
B. void executory interest.
C. valid executory interest.
D. void contingent remainder
Answer: B
Brill saved the life of Ace's wife, Mary, who thereafter changed her will to leave Brill $1,000. However, upon Mary's death she had no property except an undivided interest in real estate held in tenancy by the entirety of Ace. The property had been purchased by Ace from an inheritance. After Mary died, Ace signed and delivered to Brill the following instrument: "In consideration of Brill's saving my wife's life and his agreement to bring no claims against my estate based on her will, I hereby promise to pay Brill $1,000." Upon Ace's death, Brill filed a claim for $1,000. Ace's executor contested the claim on the ground that the instrument was not supported by sufficient consideration."In most states, would Brill's saving of Mary's life be regarded as sufficient consideration for Ace's promise?
A. Yes, because Ace was thereby morally obligated to Brill. 
B. Yes, because Ace was thereby materially benefited. 
C. No, because Ace had not asked Brill to save her. 
D. No, because the value of Brill's act was too uncertain
Answer: C
Brill saved the life of Ace's wife, Mary, who thereafter changed her will to leave Brill $1,000. However, upon Mary's death she had no property except an undivided interest in real estate held in tenancy by the entirety of Ace. The property had been purchased by Ace from an inheritance. After Mary died, Ace signed and delivered to Brill the following instrument: "In consideration of Brill's saving my wife's life and his agreement to bring no claims against my estate based on her will, I hereby promise to pay Brill $1,000." Upon Ace's death, Brill filed a claim for $1,000. Ace's executor contested the claim on the ground that the instrument was not supported by sufficient consideration."With respect to the recital that Brill had agreed not to file a claim against Ace's estate, what additional fact would most strengthen Brill's claim?
A. Brill's agreement was made in a writing he signed.
B. Brill reasonably believed he had a valid claim when the instrument was signed.
C. Mary had contributed to accumulation of the real property.
D. Brill paid Ace $1 when he received the instrument.
Answer: B
Brill saved the life of Ace's wife, Mary, who thereafter changed her will to leave Brill $1,000. However, upon Mary's death she had no property except an undivided interest in real estate held in tenancy by the entirety of Ace. The property had been purchased by Ace from an inheritance. After Mary died, Ace signed and delivered to Brill the following instrument: "In consideration of Brill's saving my wife's life and his agreement to bring no claims against my estate based on her will, I hereby promise to pay Brill $1,000." Upon Ace's death, Brill filed a claim for $1,000. Ace's executor contested the claim on the ground that the instrument was not supported by sufficient consideration."On which of the following theories would it be most likely that Brill could recover?
A. Ace and Brill have made a compromise.
B. Ace must give restitution for benefits it would be unjust to retain.
C. Ace is bound by promissory estoppel.
D. Ace executed a binding unilateral contract
Answer: A
Brown suffered from the delusion that he was a special agent of God. He frequently experienced hallucinations in the form of hearing divine commands. Brown believed God told him several times that the local Roman Catholic bishop was corrupting the diocese into heresy, and that the bishop should be "done away with." Brown, a devout Catholic, conceived of himself as a religious martyr. He knew that shooting bishops for heresy is against the criminal law. He nevertheless carefully planned how he might kill the bishop. One evening Brown shot the bishop, who was then taken to the hospital where he died two weeks later. Brown told the police he assumed the institutions of society would support the ecclesiastical hierarchy and he expected to be persecuted for his God-inspired actions. Psychiatrist Stevens examined Brown and found that Brown suffered from schizophrenic psychosis, that in the absence of this psychosis, he would not have shot the bishop, and that because of the psychosis, Brown found it extremely difficult to determine whether he should obey the specific command that he do away with the bishop or the general commandment "Thou shalt not kill." Brown was charged with murder. If Brown interposes an insanity defense and the jurisdiction in which he is tried has adopted only the M'Naghten test of insanity, then the strongest argument for the defense under that test is that
A. Brown did not know the nature of the act he was performing.
B. Brown did not know that his act was morally wrong
C. Brown did not know the quality of the act he was performing.
D. Brown's acts were the product of a mental disease.
Answer: B
Walker, a pedestrian, started north across the street in a clearly marked north-south crosswalk with the green traffic light in her favor. Walker was in a hurry, and before reaching the north curb on the street, she cut to her left diagonally across the street to the east-west crosswalk and started across it. Just after she reached the east-west crosswalk, the traffic light turned green in her favor. She had proceeded about five steps farther across the street to the west in the crosswalk when she was struck by a car approaching from her right that she thought would stop but did not. The car was driven by Driver, 81 years of age, who failed to stop his car after seeing that the traffic light was red against him. Walker had a bone disease, resulting in very brittle bones, that is prevalent in only 0.02 percent of the population. As a result of the impact Walker suffered a broken leg and the destruction of her family heirloom, a Picasso original painting that she was taking to her bank for safekeeping. The painting had been purchased by Walker's grandmother for $750 but was valued at $500,000 at the time of the accident. Walker has filed suit against Driver. Driver's attorney has alleged that Walker violated a state statute requiring that pedestrians stay in crosswalks, and that if Walker had not violated the statute she would have had to walk 25 feet more to reach the impact point and therefore would not have been at a place where she could have been hit by Driver. Walker's attorney ascertains that there is a statute as alleged by Driver, that his measurements are correct, that there is a state statute requiring observance of traffic lights, and that Driver's license expired two years prior to the collision"The violation of the crosswalk statute by Walker should not defeat her cause of action against Driver because
A. Driver violated the traffic light statute at a later point in time than Walker's violation.
B. pedestrians are entitled to assume that automobile drivers will obey the law.
C. Walker was hit while in the crosswalk. 79
D. the risks that the statute was designed to protect against probably did not include an earlier arrival at another point
Answer: D
Walker, a pedestrian, started north across the street in a clearly marked north-south crosswalk with the green traffic light in her favor. Walker was in a hurry, and before reaching the north curb on the street, she cut to her left diagonally across the street to the east-west crosswalk and started across it. Just after she reached the east-west crosswalk, the traffic light turned green in her favor. She had proceeded about five steps farther across the street to the west in the crosswalk when she was struck by a car approaching from her right that she thought would stop but did not. The car was driven by Driver, 81 years of age, who failed to stop his car after seeing that the traffic light was red against him. Walker had a bone disease, resulting in very brittle bones, that is prevalent in only 0.02 percent of the population. As a result of the impact Walker suffered a broken leg and the destruction of her family heirloom, a Picasso original painting that she was taking to her bank for safekeeping. The painting had been purchased by Walker's grandmother for $750 but was valued at $500,000 at the time of the accident. Walker has filed suit against Driver. Driver's attorney has alleged that Walker violated a state statute requiring that pedestrians stay in crosswalks, and that if Walker had not violated the statute she would have had to walk 25 feet more to reach the impact point and therefore would not have been at a place where she could have been hit by Driver. Walker's attorney ascertains that there is a statute as alleged by Driver, that his measurements are correct, that there is a state statute requiring observance of traffic lights, and that Driver's license expired two years prior to the collision"The failure of Driver to have a valid driver's license has which of the following effects?
A. It makes Driver liable to Walker because Driver is a trespasser on the highway.
B. It would not furnish a basis for liability.
C. It proves that Driver is an unfit driver in this instance.
D. It makes Driver absolutely liable for Walker's injury
Answer: B
Walker, a pedestrian, started north across the street in a clearly marked north-south crosswalk with the green traffic light in her favor. Walker was in a hurry, and before reaching the north curb on the street, she cut to her left diagonally across the street to the east-west crosswalk and started across it. Just after she reached the east-west crosswalk, the traffic light turned green in her favor. She had proceeded about five steps farther across the street to the west in the crosswalk when she was struck by a car approaching from her right that she thought would stop but did not. The car was driven by Driver, 81 years of age, who failed to stop his car after seeing that the traffic light was red against him. Walker had a bone disease, resulting in very brittle bones, that is prevalent in only 0.02 percent of the population. As a result of the impact Walker suffered a broken leg and the destruction of her family heirloom, a Picasso original painting that she was taking to her bank for safekeeping. The painting had been purchased by Walker's grandmother for $750 but was valued at $500,000 at the time of the accident. Walker has filed suit against Driver. Driver's attorney has alleged that Walker violated a state statute requiring that pedestrians stay in crosswalks, and that if Walker had not violated the statute she would have had to walk 25 feet more to reach the impact point and therefore would not have been at a place where she could have been hit by Driver. Walker's attorney ascertains that there is a statute as alleged by Driver, that his measurements are correct, that there is a state statute requiring observance of traffic lights, and that Driver's license expired two years prior to the collision"If Walker establishes liability on the part of Driver for her physical injuries, should Walker's recovery include damages for a broken leg?
A. No, since only 0.02 percent of the population have bones as brittle as Walker's. 
B. No, unless a person of ordinary health would probably have suffered a broken leg from the impact. 
C. Yes, because Driver could foresee that there would be unforeseeable consequences of the impact. 
D. Yes, even though the extent of the injury was not a foreseeable consequence of the impact
Answer: D
Walker, a pedestrian, started north across the street in a clearly marked north-south crosswalk with the green traffic light in her favor. Walker was in a hurry, and before reaching the north curb on the street, she cut to her left diagonally across the street to the east-west crosswalk and started across it. Just after she reached the east-west crosswalk, the traffic light turned green in her favor. She had proceeded about five steps farther across the street to the west in the crosswalk when she was struck by a car approaching from her right that she thought would stop but did not. The car was driven by Driver, 81 years of age, who failed to stop his car after seeing that the traffic light was red against him. Walker had a bone disease, resulting in very brittle bones, that is prevalent in only 0.02 percent of the population. As a result of the impact Walker suffered a broken leg and the destruction of her family heirloom, a Picasso original painting that she was taking to her bank for safekeeping. The painting had been purchased by Walker's grandmother for $750 but was valued at $500,000 at the time of the accident. Walker has filed suit against Driver. Driver's attorney has alleged that Walker violated a state statute requiring that pedestrians stay in crosswalks, and that if Walker had not violated the statute she would have had to walk 25 feet more to reach the impact point and therefore would not have been at a place where she could have been hit by Driver. Walker's attorney ascertains that there is a statute as alleged by Driver, that his measurements are correct, that there is a state statute requiring observance of traffic lights, and that Driver's license expired two years prior to the collision"Walker's violation of the crosswalk statute should not be considered by the jury because
A. there is no dispute in the evidence about factual cause.
B. as a matter of law, the violation of the statute results in liability for all resulting harm. 
C. as a matter of law, Driver's conduct was an independent intervening cause. 
D. as a matter of law, the injury to Walker was not the result of a risk the statute was designed to protect against
Answer: D
Paulsen was eating in a restaurant when he began to choke on a piece of food that had lodged in his throat. Dow, a physician who was sitting at a nearby table, did not wish to become involved and did not render any assistance, although prompt medical attention would have been effective in removing the obstruction from Paulsen's throat. Because of the failure to obtain prompt medical attention, Paulsen suffered a severe brain injury from lack of oxygen. If Paulsen asserts a claim against Dow for his injuries, will Paulsen prevail?
A. Yes, if the jurisdiction relieves physicians of malpractice liability for emergency first aid. 
B. Yes, if a reasonably prudent person with Dow's experience, training, and knowledge would have assisted Paulsen. 
C. No, because Dow was not responsible for Paulsen's condition. 
D. No, because Dow knew that Paulsen was substantially certain to sustain serious injury
Answer: C