Problem: I did not view and do not view the law as providing that there is some exhaustion requirement, although I understand some cases have said that. In this particular fact situation -- and I do think, I will say, on the issue of precedent, you can distinguish cases of -- and I'm not so sure I would be as fearful as some might be as to precedential value. I think this case is somewhat distinguishable, and I don't know that a judge in another situation would knee-jerk allow this type of testimony. We are in a very unique situation here, and that's what we have.

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "I agree with the judge in this case"?

A: It's impossible to say

Problem: College Rivalry<br>It was the first time these two teams had played in 15 years. Much had changed for both schools in that time. The fans were excited to experience the rivalry game. The team that used to dominate, had weakened over the years. It was a close game, but the home team eventually won.

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "The away team was used to dominating the home team."?

A: Yes

Problem: The original spelling reform of 1996, which was meant to harmonize the spelling rules across the German-speaking countries, turned out to be a major embarrassment if not outright failure.

Based on the paragraph above can we conclude that "1996 was a bad year in German-speaking countries. "?

A:
It's impossible to say