LSAT Passage 3 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A passage about contract law states: 'The doctrine of promissory estoppel operates as an equitable remedy where no formal contract exists.' A question asks what the author means by 'equitable remedy.' Based on context, this most likely means:
- A remedy available only in criminal courts
- A remedy granted based on fairness when strict legal rules would produce an unjust result (Correct answer)
- A remedy requiring both parties to pay equal damages
- A remedy that eliminates all prior agreements between parties
Correct answer: A remedy granted based on fairness when strict legal rules would produce an unjust result
In legal contexts, 'equitable' refers to fairness-based judicial relief, distinct from strict legal rules, which matches the passage's framing of promissory estoppel.
Question 2: An LSAT passage presents this argument structure: general principle → specific application → exception to application. A question asks which of the following best describes the organization. The correct answer should identify:
- A chronological narrative followed by a rebuttal
- A hierarchy of principles arranged by importance
- A deductive framework applied to a case, then qualified by a limiting condition (Correct answer)
- A compare-and-contrast structure between two legal systems
Correct answer: A deductive framework applied to a case, then qualified by a limiting condition
The structure (principle → application → exception) is a deductive pattern where a general rule is applied and then its limits are defined.
Question 3: A passage about cognitive science and jury decision-making concludes that jurors rely heavily on narrative coherence rather than probabilistic reasoning. An 'application' question asks: which situation would MOST challenge the passage's conclusion?
- A study showing jurors convict more when a clear story is presented
- A case where jurors rejected a compelling narrative in favor of statistical DNA evidence (Correct answer)
- Research demonstrating that lawyers use storytelling techniques at trial
- A finding that jurors remember emotional testimony better than technical testimony
Correct answer: A case where jurors rejected a compelling narrative in favor of statistical DNA evidence
If jurors rejected a compelling narrative for statistical evidence, this directly contradicts the conclusion that narrative coherence drives decisions.
Question 4: In a passage discussing two competing theories of constitutional interpretation, the author states in the final paragraph: 'Neither approach fully accounts for the complexity of modern governance.' This statement most likely serves to:
- Endorse the first theory as superior to the second
- Reject both theories entirely and call for a new one
- Acknowledge limitations shared by both theories without fully abandoning either (Correct answer)
- Summarize the historical origins of constitutional interpretation
Correct answer: Acknowledge limitations shared by both theories without fully abandoning either
Saying neither approach 'fully accounts' for complexity suggests both have partial value but shared shortcomings, a balanced critique rather than outright rejection.
Question 5: An LSAT RC passage on intellectual property law uses the term 'sui generis' without defining it. The surrounding context discusses a form of protection that doesn't fit existing copyright or patent categories. What does 'sui generis' most likely mean here?
- Derived from ancient Roman legal tradition
- Of its own kind; forming a unique category (Correct answer)
- Inferior to existing legal protections
- Universally applicable across all jurisdictions
Correct answer: Of its own kind; forming a unique category
Latin for 'of its own kind,' 'sui generis' is used in legal contexts to describe something that forms its own unique category, fitting the context of protection that doesn't fit existing frameworks.
Question 6: A passage discusses the history of antitrust law and includes this sentence: 'The Sherman Act of 1890 cast a wide net, but courts gradually narrowed its reach.' What does 'narrowed its reach' most likely mean?
- Courts repealed the Sherman Act over time
- Judicial interpretations limited the range of conduct the Act could regulate (Correct answer)
- The Act was amended by Congress to cover fewer industries
- Courts expanded antitrust enforcement to international markets
Correct answer: Judicial interpretations limited the range of conduct the Act could regulate
When courts 'narrow the reach' of a statute, they interpret it to apply to fewer situations than its broad text might suggest.
Question 7: A Reading Comprehension question asks: 'The author's attitude toward the traditional view can best be described as...' The passage states the traditional view is 'outdated' and 'fails to account for recent findings.' What is the author's attitude?
- Cautious neutrality
- Enthusiastic endorsement
- Critical dismissal (Correct answer)
- Reluctant acceptance
Correct answer: Critical dismissal
Words like 'outdated' and 'fails to account for' signal that the author is critically dismissing the traditional view.
LSAT Passage 3
A passage about contract law states: 'The doctrine of promissory estoppel operates as an equitable remedy where no formal contract exists.' A question asks what the author means by 'equitable remedy.' Based on context, this most likely means: