UT Bar Multistate Essay 1 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: An employee of a company, acting within the scope of their employment, makes a binding contract with a third party. Which of the following is true regarding the liability of the company for the contract?
- The company is not liable because the employee did not have express authority to make the contract.
- The company is liable if the employee had actual authority to make the contract, whether express or implied. (Correct answer)
- The company is not liable if the employee had only apparent authority to make the contract.
- The company is liable only if the employee was authorized by the company’s board of directors to make the contract.
Correct answer: The company is liable if the employee had actual authority to make the contract, whether express or implied.
Under agency law, a company (principal) is legally liable for contracts made by its employee (agent) if the employee had actual authority to enter into that contract. Actual authority can be either express (explicitly granted) or implied (reasonably necessary to carry out express duties or customary for the position). If the employee acts within this authority, the company is bound by their actions.
Question 2: Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, when must a defendant generally file an answer to a complaint?
- Within 10 days after being served with the complaint
- Within 20 days after being served with the complaint
- Within 30 days after being served with the complaint (Correct answer)
- Within 45 days after being served with the complaint
Correct answer: Within 30 days after being served with the complaint
Under many civil procedure rules, including those in various state jurisdictions, a defendant is generally allotted 30 days to file an answer after being formally served with a complaint. This timeframe allows the defendant sufficient opportunity to review the allegations, consult legal counsel, and prepare a formal response to the court, ensuring due process.
Question 3: In a custody dispute, which of the following factors is most relevant in determining the best interest of the child?
- The financial status of each parent
- The child's preference if they are of sufficient age and maturity (Correct answer)
- The physical attractiveness of each parent
- The number of hours each parent spends at home
Correct answer: The child's preference if they are of sufficient age and maturity
In a custody dispute, courts prioritize the 'best interest of the child,' considering numerous factors. Among these, the child's preference becomes increasingly relevant and influential if they are of sufficient age and maturity to articulate a reasoned opinion. While not the sole factor, a child's well-considered wishes are given significant weight alongside parental stability, emotional ties, and the child's needs.
Question 4: Which of the following is NOT a requirement for a valid will?
- The testator must be at least 18 years old.
- The will must be signed by the testator.
- The will must be witnessed by at least two individuals.
- The will must be notarized. (Correct answer)
Correct answer: The will must be notarized.
For a will to be legally valid, the testator must typically be of legal age (usually 18), sign the will, and have it witnessed by a specified number of individuals (commonly two) who also sign in the testator's presence. While notarization can add an extra layer of authentication and is often recommended, it is generally not a legal requirement for a will's validity in most jurisdictions.
Question 5: If a testator makes a will and subsequently gets married, what is the effect of the marriage on the will in most jurisdictions?
- The marriage automatically revokes the will.
- The will remains valid and unaffected by the marriage. (Correct answer)
- The will is revoked only if the testator had no children at the time of marriage.
- The will is partially revoked to the extent it conflicts with the new marriage.
Correct answer: The will remains valid and unaffected by the marriage.
In most jurisdictions, under modern probate law, a subsequent marriage does not automatically revoke a previously made will. Instead, the new spouse is typically entitled to an intestate share of the estate, unless the will clearly indicates an intent to disinherit them or provides for them. This approach protects the new spouse while respecting the testator's prior testamentary wishes regarding other beneficiaries.
UT Bar Multistate Essay 1
An employee of a company, acting within the scope of their employment, makes a binding contract with a third party.
Which of the following is true regarding the liability of the company for the contract?