Examen
MBE Multistate Bar Examination Final 2025 Exam Review Questions and Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
- Grado
- Institución
MBE Multistate Bar Examination Final 2025 Exam Review Questions and Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
[Mostrar más]Vista previa 4 fuera de 41 páginas
Vista previa 4 fuera de 41 páginas
Añadir al carrito
Añadir al carrito
Vendedor
Seguir
StarScoreGrades
Comentarios recibidos
Vista previa del contenido
MBE Multistate Bar Examination Final2025 Exam Review Questions and
Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
David Mungai
[COMPANY NAME] [Company address]
, MBE Multistate Bar Examination Final
2025 Exam Review Questions and
Answers | 100% Pass | Graded +
Torts: How Intervening Forces Affect the Element of Legal or
Proximate Cause. AKA Indirect Causation - Answer>> As a
general principle in negligence actions, a defendant will be liable
only if his breach of care is shown to be the legal (proximate)
cause of plaintiff's harm. Not all harm actually caused by the
defendant will result in liability. In this case, the chain of events
started when the fan discarded the plastic bag. The police officer
then acted negligently in failing to remove the bag from the
horse's bridle. The intervening force that came into motion after
the officer's negligence was the horse's reaction of running into
the crowd and striking the man. This situation presents an
example of indirect causation (the officer's negligence caused his
horse to be scared, and the horse then ran away and caused the
man's death). Unmistakably, serious personal injury or even
death is foreseeable when a large, powerful animal becomes
frightened and runs through a crowded stadium. Given the
foreseeability of the ensuing events, it is likely that the defendant
will be held liable for the man's death
Torts: Fire Fighter Rule - Answer>> The firefighter's rule is
triggered only where a firefighter (or police officer) is bringing suit
as a plaintiff, and does not apply in this case involving a claim
against a police department.
Breach of Covenant Warranty Deed/Adverse Possession -
Answer>> A general warranty deed normally contains the
following five covenants for title: 1) covenant of seisin; 2)
covenant of right to convey; 3) covenant against encumbrances;
4) covenant for quiet enjoyment; and 5) covenant of warranty. In
this question, it is necessary to distinguish between a covenant
,against encumbrances and a covenant of warranty. On the one
hand, the covenant against encumbrances is a covenant assuring
that there are no encumbrances (such as easements, liens,
mortgages) against the title. On the other hand, the covenant of
warranty is a covenant wherein the grantor agrees to defend the
grantee against claims of title by a third party, and to compensate
the grantee for any loss sustained by the claim of superior title.
Since the investor is defending title against the man's adverse
possession caveat emptor would not apply duty to inspect is not
applicable, the adverse possessor occupied the premises when
the warranty deed was conveyed.
Contracts: Condition Precedent - Answer>> A condition
precedent is an event that must occur before a party is under a
duty to perform. The employee is not challenging the contract,
rather the reasonableness sign posted on the wall of the $50 fine
for being late to work
Contracts: Liquidated Damages - Answer>> The validity of a
liquidated damages provision is evaluated by the courts as
follows: it must appear at the time of formation that (1) damages
will be difficult to ascertain, and (2) the parties who agree on a
provision for liquidated damages must make a reasonable
estimate of the losses to be expected from breach. In this case,
the first prong may be satisfied, but the man can argue that $50 is
not a reasonable estimate because it takes no account of how
late he is. He may succeed on this argument, and he has a lesser
chance of success with the others.
Contracts Hypo: Modification or Waiver of Condition? The Pre-
existing Duty Rule/Hypo - Answer>> E.g. Homeowner and
Contractor have a contract to build a shed and pave the driveway
for $30,000; homeowner changes mind and says I'm going to
plant a garden there so don't pave the driveway just build the
shed; homeowner changes mind again and say no pave the
, driveway and build the shed I'm not going to plant a garden;
contractor refuses, who will prevail? The Homeowner.
Contracts Hypo: Modification or Waiver of Condition? The Pre-
existing Duty Rule/Rule/Explanation - Answer>> This contracts
question addresses the distinction between modification and
waiver of a condition. Many students will be tempted to choose
choice (B), assuming there was a valid waiver of a condition that
cannot be reclaimed in the contract to pave a driveway. By
definition, a condition is any fact or event other than lapse of time
that qualifies a promisor's present duty of performance. However,
the builder's obligation to pave the driveway was not a condition,
but an express promise. As a result, it is necessary to determine
whether the modification was valid releasing the builder of his
duty to pave the driveway. Under the pre-existing duty rule, an
enforceable agreement to modify a contract requires
consideration on both sides. Because the modification was not
supported by consideration, it would be unenforceable.
Constitutional Law/Equal Protection Cases/Discriminatory
Laws/Burden of Proof - Answer>> The initial burden is on the
plaintiff to show a discriminatory purpose, and, if proven, the
burden shifts to the state to show the measure furthers a
compelling state interest.: In order to subject a law to any form of
review under the equal protection guarantee, one must be able to
demonstrate that the law classifies people in some manner. A
classification within a law can be established in one of two ways.
First, the law may establish the classification "on its face." This
means that the law by its own terms classifies people for different
treatment. In such a case there is no problem of proof and the
court can proceed to test the validity of the classification by the
appropriate standard. Second, the law may be tested in its
"application." In these cases, the law appears to be "neutral on its
face," but will be applied in a different manner to different classes
of people. In the latter situation, the plaintiff bears the initial
Los beneficios de comprar resúmenes en Stuvia estan en línea:
Garantiza la calidad de los comentarios
Compradores de Stuvia evaluaron más de 700.000 resúmenes. Así estas seguro que compras los mejores documentos!
Compra fácil y rápido
Puedes pagar rápidamente y en una vez con iDeal, tarjeta de crédito o con tu crédito de Stuvia. Sin tener que hacerte miembro.
Enfócate en lo más importante
Tus compañeros escriben los resúmenes. Por eso tienes la seguridad que tienes un resumen actual y confiable. Así llegas a la conclusión rapidamente!
Preguntas frecuentes
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
100% de satisfacción garantizada: ¿Cómo funciona?
Nuestra garantía de satisfacción le asegura que siempre encontrará un documento de estudio a tu medida. Tu rellenas un formulario y nuestro equipo de atención al cliente se encarga del resto.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller StarScoreGrades. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for $12.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
45,681 summaries were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now
Vistos recientemente
