Preparation Flashcards

An attorney is to a client what a _____ is to a ____.

Answer: talent agent : actor

The relationship 'attorney is to a client' signifies a professional who represents and advocates for another individual's interests. A talent agent similarly represents and advocates for an actor's professional interests, such as securing roles and negotiating contracts. This parallel relationship of professional representation makes 'talent agent : actor' the correct answer.

Senator Butch is a politician, and Jane claims that "all politicians are crooked. As a result, Senator Butch is dishonest. Sam thoroughly establishes Congressman Klay's innocence after his inquiry. Which of the following statements about Sam's evidence regarding the Congressman contradicts Jane's assertion?

Answer: By questioning the validity of Jane’s premise that “All politicians are corrupt.”

Jane's assertion is a universal generalization: 'all politicians are crooked.' To contradict a universal statement, one only needs to find a single counterexample. Sam's evidence, by thoroughly establishing Congressman Klay's innocence, provides precisely that counterexample, directly challenging the validity of Jane's premise that *all* politicians are corrupt.

In the summer and fall, a squirrel who lives in a national forest spends six months gathering and burying nuts. When food is in short supply the next winter, the squirrel digs up the nuts and consumes them. Which of the following situations best compares to this situation?

Answer: A farmer plants wheat and corn in a field, and harvests the crop in the fall. The farmer and his wife then store the harvest for consumption at a later time.

The squirrel's behavior involves gathering and storing resources (nuts) during times of plenty (summer/fall) to consume later when food is scarce (winter). This directly compares to a farmer who plants, harvests, and then stores crops for later consumption. Both scenarios involve foresight, resource accumulation, and delayed gratification to ensure survival during leaner periods.

The ceremonial gala celebration for the opening of the city's new convention center and symphony hall is attended by Jasmine and Gavin. Jasmine, who is dressed in a long evening gown, gets on the escalator to take in the view of the atrium from the second story. However, the guide mechanism on the escalator side and the moving escalator step collide, trapping Jasmine's gown. When the mechanism reaches the second floor, it pulls on Jasmine's robe, resulting in her falling and getting hurt. Which of the following situations best compares to this situation?

Answer: A passenger is injured when his scarf catches the door of a city bus and the bus starts to pull away.

Jasmine's injury occurs because her clothing (gown) gets caught in a moving mechanism (escalator), which then pulls on her, causing a fall and injury. This situation is best compared to a passenger whose scarf catches in a city bus door as the bus pulls away, resulting in injury. Both involve an article of clothing becoming entangled in a moving part of a transportation mechanism, leading to harm.

The construction of an expansion on a homeowner's cottage by the sea was contracted out to a contractor. According to the contract, the contractor was to start working on May 1 and finish by June 15. The homeowner's cottage was totally damaged by a hurricane on April 25. The homeowner sued the contractor when the latter didn't start the addition's construction on May 1. Which of the following situations best compares to this situation?

Answer: A casino owner contracts a magician to put on a magic performance in the casino's entertainment lounge, but two days before the contract was supposed to start, the entertainment lounge is completely destroyed in a fire. The magician is then sued by the casino owner.

The core of the original situation is a contract for services (building an addition) where the subject matter (the cottage) is destroyed *before* the work is supposed to begin, making performance impossible. Despite this, the homeowner sues for non-performance. The casino owner suing the magician after the venue is destroyed *before* the performance is a direct parallel: the contracted service becomes impossible due to the destruction of the necessary location, yet a lawsuit for non-performance is initiated.

While driving south on Oak Drive, a brown automobile ran a red light at the intersection of Oak Avenue and President's Way. Jenny was traveling east on President's Way in her Prius. The light was green as she approached Oak Avenue, so she continued through the intersection, but Jenny's car and the brown automobile collided. Although Bailey owns the brown vehicle, he was not the driver at the time of the crash. Karen works as a paralegal for a lawyer who is thinking about suing for Jennt's negligence. The lawyer requests that Kara evaluate Jenny's case's facts and decide whether any further fact-finding is required. Should Karen let everyone know that more research is required?

Answer: Yes, because nothing is known about why another person was driving Bailey’s car.

The key unknown in Jenny's case is the identity and relationship of the person driving Bailey's car. To properly assess potential liability, it's crucial to determine if the driver was authorized, an employee, or had some other connection to Bailey that could impact the legal responsibility for the accident. Without this information, a complete evaluation of the case facts is impossible, necessitating further investigation.

On a three-week trial, Pauline is a trial paralegal assisting lawyer Leni Osaka. Pauline spent a lot of time creating trial notebooks, an electronic database, and evidence for the courtroom. Pauline assists Leni with the jury selection procedure and a PowerPoint® presentation utilized during the opening statements after the trial has begun. Leni discovers that Pauline is highly skilled and adept at anticipating her requirements as the trial goes on, enabling her to make a compelling and polished argument before the jury. Personal note: Pauline likes using her Facebook® page to connect with her friends and family. Pauline comments on her public Facebook® page the night before closing arguments that she has been working on a trial and finds one of the jurors to be rather beautiful. Did Pauline make a wise decision when she made that comment?

Answer: No, because the Facebook® posting was public and could be viewed as an attempt to influence the juror.

Pauline's public comment about a juror, even if seemingly innocuous, creates an appearance of impropriety and could be viewed as an attempt to influence the juror or compromise the impartiality of the trial. Legal professionals, including paralegals, are bound by ethical rules that require them to avoid actions that could undermine the integrity of the judicial process. A public social media post about a juror directly violates these principles.

Choose the response that fully answers the following: If a plaintiff sustained actual losses as a result of another driver's negligence, then all of those drivers are accountable. Paul, the plaintiff, was hurt as a result of Darlene's careless driving, which resulted in actual damages.

Answer: Darling is liable for Plaintiff Park’s actual damages.

The argument states a conditional rule: 'If a plaintiff sustained actual losses as a result of another driver's negligence, then all of those drivers are accountable.' It then provides specific facts that meet the conditions: Paul (plaintiff) was hurt due to Darlene's careless driving, resulting in actual damages. Therefore, the direct logical conclusion is that Darlene is accountable for Paul's actual damages, as she is 'one of those drivers' who caused the negligence and damages.

Paralegal Jeffrey works for Tyron & Associates. Marta is a lawyer who specializes in estate preparation and probate, and she works alongside Jeffrey. In one instance, Marta is Kevin's attorney. Kevin's father recently passed away and was a widower when he did. In his testament, Kevin's father bequeathed Tine, a lovely 30-year-old caregiver who looked after Kevin's father just before he passed away, 90% of his sizable estate. Kevin wants to contest the legitimacy of his father's will because he thinks Tine forced him to alter it. Marta suggests using excessive influence as the basis for the challenge. The existence and use of influence over the testator constitutes the first element of undue influence. Which set of facts from the available options for answers best supports the first element?

Answer: Tine withheld meals and medication from Kevin’s father until he agreed to increase Tine’s hourly wage.

The first element of undue influence is the 'existence and use of influence over the testator.' Option C, where Tine withheld meals and medication until Kevin's father agreed to increase her wage, demonstrates a clear exertion of coercive power over the testator's basic needs. This act directly shows Tine using her position to manipulate and control the father, strongly supporting the 'use of influence' element required for an undue influence claim.

A mid-sized law company called Curley & Moe employs Joe as a paralegal. Bobie is her managing attorney. In the sale of Gilbert's company's manufacturing division, Bobie is Gilbert's representative. Joe is aware that Curley & Moe has $75,000 in its trust account as required by the purchase and selling agreement. A check request form is used to get checks for payment of funds out of the firm's trust account as part of Curley & Moe's procedures for managing client money and depositing fees. However, only two senior partners are signatories on the trust account, and a senior partner oversees every account. The $75,000 can be given to Gilbert in accordance with the terms of the purchase and sale agreement once the buyer has acquired all of the manufacturing division's assets. All of the assets have been transferred after a month of work. Joe's supervising lawyer has instructed Joe to make a check request to the office manager and get a check for $75,000 made out to Gilbert. Which of the following response options best describes Joe's response?

Answer: Prepare the check request according to office procedure, obtain the check for Gilbert, and inform her supervising attorney as soon as she has the check.

Joe's role as a paralegal is to follow the instructions of his supervising attorney within the bounds of ethical rules and firm procedures. Since the funds are legitimately due to the client, the transaction is complete, and Joe is following the firm's established procedure for requesting checks from the trust account, his appropriate response is to execute the task as instructed. The supervising attorney is ultimately responsible for the ethical disbursement of client funds.

A Florida-based company called Sunrise Travel sells cruises and other types of holiday packages. It has 500 employees. Except for the President and other executives chosen by the Board of Directors, all employees of Sunrise Travel are deemed to be at-will workers, according to the company's articles of incorporation. Sunrise Travel's president is Mr. Santos. All at-will employees of Sunrise Travel are subject to the policies in the employee handbook, which was published by the company's human resources division. Would it be accurate for a paralegal to get to the conclusion that Mr. Santos is exempt from the policies in the employee handbook?

Answer: No, because being an officer of Sunrise Travel does not preclude application of the handbook.

The company's articles of incorporation explicitly state that the President and other executives are *not* considered at-will employees. The employee handbook, however, states that 'All at-will employees of Sunrise Travel are subject to the policies in the employee handbook.' Since Mr. Santos is the President and therefore not an at-will employee, his status does not automatically exempt him from *all* policies within the handbook. The handbook might contain general policies applicable to all employees, or specific policies for officers, even if the 'at-will' specific provisions do not apply to him. Thus, concluding he is entirely exempt based solely on his non-at-will status is not necessarily accurate.

Choose the response that fully answers the following: Every person is mortal. Gentin is from another planet.

Answer: None of the above.

The first premise states 'Every person is mortal.' The second premise states 'Gentin is from another planet.' While it's a common inference that someone 'from another planet' is not a human being (and thus not a 'person' in the context of the first premise), this is not a strictly logical deduction. A human could theoretically be born on another planet or travel from one. Since we cannot definitively conclude that Gentin is not a human being, we cannot apply the mortality rule, nor can we deduce any of the other specific options with absolute certainty based *only* on the given premises.

500 people work at Bigtime Business, a Minnesota-based company that produces widgets. All employees of Bigtime Business, with the exception of the President and other officers chosen by the Board of Directors, are deemed to be at-will employees, according to the company's articles of incorporation. All employees of Bigtime Business joined the union that the company's workers established, however, the union stipulated in a collective bargaining agreement that all at-will employees must abide by the policies in Bigtime Business' employee handbook. What minor premise would be required if a paralegal came to the judgment that Mr. Hallsmith was subject to the policies outlined in the employee handbook?

Answer: Mr. Hallsmith is an at-will employee of Bigtime Business.

The union agreement stipulates that 'all at-will employees must abide by the policies in Bigtime Business' employee handbook.' For a paralegal to conclude that Mr. Hallsmith is subject to these policies, the necessary missing premise is that Mr. Hallsmith himself is an at-will employee. This premise directly connects him to the group specified in the union agreement as being subject to the handbook.

Terry is a paralegal who works for a law firm with three attorneys. Terry mostly handles custody and family law cases for Chernobyl. A former customer named Daniel just had his divorce proceedings concluded. When Chernobyl was in court one afternoon, Terry got a call from Daniel. Daniel expressed his desire to work with Chernobyl again for a different case because of how much he valued their work on his case. David requested permission to drop off a check made out to the company's trust that day so that he may "withdraw" the money later. He declared that he would pay a fair charge for the duration the monies were held in the trust account but expressed no interest in obtaining interest on the funds. Which of the following answer options best describes Joe's response?

Answer: Explain to David that a law firm trust account cannot be used to hold funds in the manner described-like a bank-and if he persists, offer to ask Cheryl to return his call.

A law firm's trust account is strictly regulated and intended solely for funds related to legal services. Using it as a personal bank account, as Daniel proposes, constitutes an unethical commingling of funds and an unauthorized banking service. Terry's correct response is to explain this ethical boundary and offer to have the attorney return Daniel's call to address his needs appropriately, without misusing the trust account.

As a(n) ________ is to __________, the US Constitution is to the Bill of Rights.

Answer: statute : amendments

The relationship between the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights is that the Bill of Rights consists of the first ten amendments, which are additions and modifications to the original Constitution. This relationship is directly analogous to a statute (a written law) and its amendments, which are formal changes or additions made to that statute. Both pairs represent a foundational legal document and subsequent modifications.

Day is to night as a(n) _________ is to a(n) ________.

Answer: positive charge : negative charge

The relationship 'Day is to night' represents a pair of direct opposites or complementary states. Similarly, 'positive charge : negative charge' represents two fundamental, opposing forces in physics. This direct opposition and complementary nature make it the best fit for the analogy.