MIXED SUBJECT

PRACTICE ESSAY
QUESTIONS
Copyright © 2016 by BARBRI, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording,
or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
 PRACTICE ESSAY QUESTIONS 1.

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Ann and Bill, both citizens of State X, were walking by a construction site in State X when
an overhead crane dropped a load of plate glass windows on the sidewalk near them. The
windows shattered when they hit the pavement, and both Ann and Bill were struck by flying
glass. Ann’s injuries were severe; she incurred more than $450,000 in medical expenses. Bill
suffered only minor injuries and had medical bills of $500.

At the time of the accident, the glass windows were being installed in a new skyscraper by
GlassCo, Inc., a State Y corporation with its principal place of business in State Y. The
crane operator was a GlassCo employee, and the crane was owned by GlassCo. A subse-
quent investigation by GlassCo’s insurance company concluded that the accident was due to
crane operator error and improper crane maintenance.

Ann and Bill have joined as plaintiffs and filed a suit against GlassCo in a state trial court
in State X. Ann is seeking more than $1 million in damages, and Bill is seeking $5,000.
They have both refused GlassCo’s request to enter into settlement negotiations.

You are an associate in the law firm that has been retained by GlassCo. The partner in
charge of the case wants to remove the lawsuit from state to federal court. She has asked:

1. What must GlassCo do to remove the case from state to federal court? Explain.

2. If the case is removed to federal court, do the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permit
the separate claims of Ann and Bill to remain joined in a single lawsuit? Explain.

3. If Ann’s and Bill’s claims remain joined, will the federal court have jurisdiction over
the case? Explain.
2. MIXED SUBJECTS

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

The legislature of the state of Red recently passed legislation known as the “Red Patriot
Act,” which is set out below in its entirety:

The Red Patriot Act

Section 1. This enactment shall be known as the “Red Patriot Act.”

Section 2. The recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance shall be a regular

part of the morning activities of every school in this state. Every school
in this state shall include in its curriculum instruction as to the proper
protocols for the display, protection, and honoring of the flags of Red and
of the United States. At the beginning of the fourth grade, every child
attending a public or private school in the state of Red shall demonstrate
knowledge of the words of the Pledge of Allegiance as then defined in the
United States Code.

Section 3. Red citizens who register for the draft shall receive upon their
registration for the draft or upon their presentation to the Office of the
Red Secretary of State proof of their registration, a tuition credit check
in the amount of $500, which may be used only to offset the tuition or
fees charged by any university, college, or technical school operated by
the state of Red.

The governor has indicated that he will sign the legislation so long as there exist reasonable
arguments in favor of the Act’s constitutionality under the United States Constitution. As
counsel for the governor, you have been asked to provide a memorandum discussing whether
the legislation could withstand a constitutional attack.
Note that under federal law, females are neither required nor permitted to register for the draft.
Please:
1. Describe the challenge that might be made to the Patriot Act under the Free Speech
Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
2. Describe the challenge that might be made to the Pledge of Allegiance under the Estab-
lishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
3. Describe the challenge that might be made to the Patriot Act under the Equal Protec-
tion Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
For each of the issues above, be sure to explain the test or standard that a court will apply
in resolving the question, and describe the strongest argument that you think can reason-
ably be made in favor of the constitutionality of the legislation.
 PRACTICE ESSAY QUESTIONS 3.

CONTRACTS AND SALES

Rachel is a popular chef. She was recently hired to host a new prime time cooking show—
Rays of Rachel. She was paid $250,000 for each episode. The show was a ratings success.
Anxious to continue the relationship, Jeff, the network president, sent an email to Rachel
that stated in pertinent part:

The network hereby offers to pay you $2.5 million to host 10 episodes of
Rays of Rachel over the next six months.

***

You may accept this offer by return email indicating your consent or
printing this email and faxing it back to us. Please respond by the end of
the day.

Jeff Zisser
President, MAB Television
Los Angeles, CA
(o) (555) 555-1234
(f) (555) 555-1235

Rachel read the email and immediately called Jeff. Rachel told Jeff that she would not do
the shows for less than $3.5 million. She also said that she wanted her lawyer to review the
contract before she signed. Jeff agreed to the pay increase and told Rachel that her lawyer
could look at the contract as long as she decided to sign or not sign by the end of the day. He
told her that if she agreed, she should print the email, handwrite the new salary figure in,
initial the change, sign the contract, and fax it to him by the end of the day.

Rachel immediately forwarded the email to her lawyer, who gave his approval. She then
followed Jeff’s instructions. She printed the email, wrote in the new salary figure, initialed
the change, and signed and dated the contract. She then put the signed agreement into an
envelope addressed to Jeff and dropped the letter in the mail.

Later that day, Rachel turned down a $2 million offer to do a cooking show for another
network.

The next day, since Jeff had not heard from Rachel, he assumed that the deal was off and
called another chef—his good friend Paula, who was dean of a local cooking school. He
offered to give her a prime time cooking show and to pay her $50,000 per episode. She
quickly agreed.

Two days later, Jeff received Rachel’s letter in the mail. He also saw an article on a televi-
sion gossip website explaining how Rachel had just turned down a $2 million cooking show
to work at MAB. Having gone to law school before becoming a television executive, Jeff
became worried about his transactions with Rachel and contacted MAB’s legal department.
He related to them all of the above facts, and asked whether the network has a contract
with, or liability to, Rachel.

How should the legal department advise him? Be sure to fully explain your reasoning.
4. MIXED SUBJECTS

CRIMINAL LAW

At the local tavern, after an excruciating Chicago Bulls loss, Joe and Bill begin to reminisce
about “the good old days” when the Bulls won six championships. However, their nostalgic
mood soon sours when they begin to argue about whether Michael Jordan is the greatest
athlete who ever lived. Joe becomes angered by Bill’s obstinacy in refusing to agree
that Jordan is the greatest. In his frustration, he punches Bill once, squarely on the jaw,
knocking Bill off his bar stool to the floor. Bill suffers a broken jaw and a concussion and
requires hospitalization. While Bill is in the hospital, a nurse misreads his chart and gives
him a painkiller to which he is allergic. He has a severe allergic reaction, lapses into a
coma, and dies.

Discuss whether Joe is guilty of common law murder.

 PRACTICE ESSAY QUESTIONS 5.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

On Thanksgiving day, Officer Francine Fife was monitoring traffic on a local highway. Her
standard practice had been to stop only cars going more than 10 m.p.h. over the legal limit
and then write citations for traffic offenses. While doing this, she also watched for evidence
of illegal drug trafficking or other serious offenses. Because “business” was slow that day,
however, she decided to pull over all vehicles traveling only five m.p.h. over the limit.

The first car she pulled over was driven by Doug Driver, who was traveling five m.p.h. over
the posted speed limit according to Fife’s radar. As she approached Driver, she smelled a
strong odor which, based on her training and experience, she believed to be marijuana. She
also noticed that Driver had bloodshot eyes and appeared to be disoriented. She then saw a
hand‑rolled cigarette containing a green substance in the open ashtray inside the car. After
ordering Driver out, Fife entered the car and seized the cigarette. Believing that a larger
stash of marijuana was close by, she continued to search until she found a bag of green leafy
substance hidden under Driver’s seat. The cigarette and the substance in the bag were later
tested and found to contain marijuana.

Driver’s attorney has filed a suppression motion to exclude both the marijuana cigarette
and the bag of marijuana.

How should the court rule on the motion to suppress? Discuss and decide.
6. MIXED SUBJECTS

EVIDENCE

Alice was riding her bicycle down Main Street. Brent, driving home in his van, came
through the intersection and hit Alice. Alice filed suit against Brent in federal court,
alleging that he negligently ran a stop sign, causing her bodily injury. Assume that jurisdic-
tion is proper in federal court.

Applying only the Federal Rules of Evidence, discuss whether the following evidence offered
at trial is admissible under the hearsay rule. (Do not discuss any other evidentiary princi-
ples.)
1. Offered by Alice—Alice’s testimony that just after the accident, Brent stepped out of
his van and said, “I’m so sorry that I ran that stop sign and hit you.”
2. Offered by Brent—testimony by John that his brother, who witnessed the accident,
told him, “Brent stopped at the stop sign and looked both ways before cautiously
proceeding into the intersection.”

3. Offered by Alice—testimony by a mechanic that a day before the accident the

mechanic looked at Brent’s van and told Brent, “These brakes are barely functioning.”
 PRACTICE ESSAY QUESTIONS 7.

REAL PROPERTY

Mike owned and operated Maltenhops, a booming restaurant and brewery located in
the suburbs. On February 1, Mike executed and delivered a deed to Maltenhops to Joe to
satisfy an existing debt. Joe, an airline pilot with a busy schedule, allowed Mike to continue
to operate the restaurant and did not immediately record his deed.

On October 1, Mike, for valuable consideration, executed and delivered a deed conveying
“all my right, title, and interest” in Maltenhops to Will, who had no knowledge of Joe’s
deed. Joe recorded his deed on October 15, and Will recorded his deed two days later.

Joe visited Maltenhops in early November and, to his amazement, found Will operating the
restaurant. He asked for Mike and Will replied, “I’m not sure where he is. I own this place
now.” Joe filed a quiet title action against Will. Who should prevail? Discuss.
8. MIXED SUBJECTS

TORTS

Jill Jefferson drove her car downtown to see a movie one Saturday night. She pulled into
the entrance of an enclosed parking garage owned and operated by Park-Rite, Inc. Park-
Rite’s employee, Sid Sleepy, instructed her to leave the ignition keys in the car and the door
open. Jill did as instructed, then walked off to the theater.

Sid was about to park Jill’s car when the phone inside his office rang. The caller was Sid’s
estranged wife, with whom Sid proceeded to have a long and heated quarrel. While Sid’s
back was turned, Ray Jones, a passerby, decided on impulse to take Jill’s car for a joyride.
He backed the car out of the garage entrance unobserved and drove away. Sid noticed the
theft a few minutes later and promptly called the police. An hour later, while negligently
driving Jill’s car, Jones was involved in an accidental collision with Harriet Hollis, a pedes-
trian, who was badly hurt.

Harriet sues Jill and Park-Rite for negligence. A state statute provides that “no person shall
permit any motor vehicle operated by him to remain unattended in any place accessible
to the public without locking the ignition and removing the keys.” Park-Rite, Inc. and Jill
move for summary disposition. Taking all of the foregoing facts as proved by affidavits and
admissions, write a brief memorandum for the trial court granting or denying each motion
and explaining your reasoning.