Oregon Bar Exam (NextGen UBE) — Questions and Answers

Question 1: Director self-dealing transactions (interested director transactions) are subject to scrutiny under Oregon corporate law. Such a transaction will be upheld if:

The transaction was commercially reasonable based on subsequent market conditions
The interested director recused from the vote and the transaction was approved by disinterested directors or shareholders after full disclosure (Correct answer)
The interested director voted in favor and the full board unanimously approved
The interested director disclosed the conflict to the CEO but not the full board

Correct answer: The interested director recused from the vote and the transaction was approved by disinterested directors or shareholders after full disclosure

An interested director transaction survives challenge if it was approved by disinterested directors or shareholders following full disclosure of the material facts about the director's interest.

Question 2: A plaintiff seeks a preliminary injunction to halt defendant's competing business. Which factor is NOT part of the traditional four-factor test?

Irreparable harm to the movant absent the injunction
Likelihood of success on the merits
Balance of equities and whether the injunction serves the public interest
That the defendant acted with fraudulent intent (Correct answer)

Correct answer: That the defendant acted with fraudulent intent

The four-factor Winter test for preliminary injunctions does not include fraudulent intent; it requires likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of equities, and public interest.

Question 3: Compensatory spousal support in Oregon is awarded primarily to:

Help a spouse maintain the marital standard of living indefinitely
Cover reasonable living expenses during the dissolution proceeding
Provide a dependent spouse with long-term financial security
Reimburse a spouse for significant contributions to the other's education, training, or career advancement (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Reimburse a spouse for significant contributions to the other's education, training, or career advancement

Compensatory support under ORS 107.105(1)(d)(B) recognizes the economic sacrifice one spouse made to advance the other's earning capacity.

Question 4: How long must an Oregon attorney generally retain client files after the conclusion of a matter?

Seven years (Correct answer)
One year
Three years
Indefinitely

Correct answer: Seven years

Oregon State Bar guidelines recommend retaining client files for at least seven years after the matter closes.

Question 5: What constitutes a fixture in real property law?

Any item found on the property
Government-installed improvements only
Personal property that has become permanently attached to real property (Correct answer)
Only structural elements like walls and roofs

Correct answer: Personal property that has become permanently attached to real property

A fixture is personal property that has been attached to real property in a manner suggesting permanence, becoming part of the realty and transferring with the property.

Question 6: The parol evidence rule bars the introduction of prior or contemporaneous oral agreements to:

Explain an ambiguous term in the written contract
Contradict a term in a fully integrated written contract (Correct answer)
Prove a condition precedent to the contract's effectiveness
Show that a written contract was obtained by fraud

Correct answer: Contradict a term in a fully integrated written contract

The parol evidence rule prohibits using extrinsic evidence to contradict the terms of a fully integrated written agreement.

Question 7: What damages are recoverable in a negligence action?

Only out-of-pocket medical expenses
A flat statutory amount per injury
Only the cost of the defendant's insurance deductible
Compensatory damages including economic losses, pain and suffering, and sometimes punitive damages (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Compensatory damages including economic losses, pain and suffering, and sometimes punitive damages

Negligence plaintiffs may recover compensatory damages (economic and non-economic) and, in cases of egregious conduct, punitive damages to punish and deter.

Question 8: Plaintiff serves 35 interrogatories on defendant in a federal diversity case. Defendant objects that the number exceeds the limit. What is the default limit under FRCP 33?

20 interrogatories including subparts
30 interrogatories excluding subparts
No numerical limit; courts set limits by scheduling order only
25 interrogatories including discrete subparts (Correct answer)

Correct answer: 25 interrogatories including discrete subparts

FRCP 33(a)(1) limits a party to 25 interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, unless the court orders or the parties stipulate otherwise.

Question 9: Under Oregon corporate law, which of the following is NOT required for a de facto corporation to exist, shielding promoters from personal liability?

A good-faith attempt to incorporate
Filing of articles of incorporation with the Secretary of State (Correct answer)
A valid law under which the corporation could be organized
Actual use of corporate privileges

Correct answer: Filing of articles of incorporation with the Secretary of State

De facto corporation status requires a valid enabling statute, a good-faith incorporation attempt, and actual use of corporate powers — not actual filed articles.

Question 10: A special litigation committee (SLC) is formed by a corporation to evaluate a shareholder derivative claim. Under the majority approach, the court's review of the SLC's recommendation to dismiss includes:

Review only for whether the SLC followed proper procedures, not the merits
Full de novo review of the underlying claims on the merits
No review — the court must defer entirely to the SLC's business judgment
A two-step inquiry: independence/good faith of the SLC, then whether the court agrees with the recommendation (Correct answer)

Correct answer: A two-step inquiry: independence/good faith of the SLC, then whether the court agrees with the recommendation

Most courts apply the Zapata two-step: first examining SLC independence and procedural integrity, then applying the court's own business judgment whether dismissal serves corporate interests.

Question 11: The doctrine of after-acquired title (estoppel by deed) provides that if a grantor conveys property they do not yet own and later acquires title, then:

Title automatically inures to the benefit of the grantee when the grantor acquires it (Correct answer)
The grantor must pay the grantee money damages equal to the property's current value
The grantee must re-record the original deed after the grantor acquires title
The original deed is void and the grantee must obtain a new deed from the grantor

Correct answer: Title automatically inures to the benefit of the grantee when the grantor acquires it

Under the after-acquired title doctrine, when a grantor who lacked title at conveyance later acquires that title, it automatically passes to the prior grantee, estopping the grantor from asserting ownership.

Question 12: In Oregon, which of the following accurately describes the 'loss of chance' doctrine in medical malpractice cases?

It allows a plaintiff to recover damages proportional to the reduced chance of a better outcome caused by the defendant's negligence (Correct answer)
It applies only when the patient had less than a 25% chance of survival before treatment
It allows a plaintiff to recover 100% of damages if the physician reduced survival odds by any amount
It is not recognized in Oregon; plaintiffs must prove the negligence more likely than not caused the harm

Correct answer: It allows a plaintiff to recover damages proportional to the reduced chance of a better outcome caused by the defendant's negligence

Oregon recognizes the loss of chance doctrine, allowing recovery proportional to the statistical reduction in the chance of a better outcome caused by the defendant's negligence.

Question 13: The doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies when:

An agency must defer to federal law before applying state administrative procedures
A court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over an administrative dispute
A court must review prior agency decisions before allowing the agency to act again
A court should defer initial decision-making to an agency with specialized expertise before ruling (Correct answer)

Correct answer: A court should defer initial decision-making to an agency with specialized expertise before ruling

Primary jurisdiction allows courts to refer matters to agencies that have specialized expertise or the need for uniformity, even when courts have jurisdiction to hear the case.

Question 14: Under Oregon law, the statutory period required for a successful adverse possession claim is:

5 years
7 years
10 years (Correct answer)
20 years

Correct answer: 10 years

Oregon's adverse possession statute (ORS 105.620) requires continuous, hostile, open, notorious, and exclusive possession for 10 years before the claimant may bring a quiet title action.

Question 15: Which of the following best describes the 'eggshell skull' (thin skull) rule in Oregon tort law?

A defendant takes the plaintiff as they find them and is liable for the full extent of harm even if unforeseeable (Correct answer)
A defendant is not liable if the plaintiff had a pre-existing condition that contributed to the injury
A defendant is only liable for foreseeable injuries
A defendant's liability is capped at the typical harm for such incidents

Correct answer: A defendant takes the plaintiff as they find them and is liable for the full extent of harm even if unforeseeable

The eggshell skull rule holds that a tortfeasor is liable for the full extent of a plaintiff's injuries even if the plaintiff is unusually susceptible and the extent of harm was unforeseeable.

Question 16: In Case 1, a jury found that Defendant drove negligently. In Case 2, a different plaintiff sues Defendant for injuries in the same accident. Plaintiff invokes collateral estoppel offensively. The court will permit it if:

Plaintiff was a party or in privity with a party in Case 1
Defendant had a full and fair opportunity to litigate negligence in Case 1, the issue was essential to the judgment, and Plaintiff could not have joined Case 1 (Correct answer)
The same judge presides over both cases
Plaintiff's injuries are identical to those of the Case 1 plaintiff

Correct answer: Defendant had a full and fair opportunity to litigate negligence in Case 1, the issue was essential to the judgment, and Plaintiff could not have joined Case 1

Offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel is permitted under Parklane Hosiery if the defendant had a full and fair opportunity to litigate, the issue was necessary to the prior judgment, and the new plaintiff could not easily have joined the prior action.

Question 17: The 'hard look' doctrine in administrative law, developed in Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Ass'n v. State Farm, primarily requires:

Courts to independently review the full administrative record without any deference to the agency
Agencies to conduct formal hearings on the record before issuing any significant rule
Agencies to genuinely consider relevant factors and alternatives before making a regulatory decision (Correct answer)
Courts to apply strict scrutiny to all agency decisions that affect constitutional rights

Correct answer: Agencies to genuinely consider relevant factors and alternatives before making a regulatory decision

The hard look doctrine requires agencies to take a genuine, thorough look at the relevant factors, reasonable alternatives, and the evidence when making regulatory decisions.

Question 18: Plaintiff files a diversity action in Oregon federal court. Defendant timely moves to transfer venue to the District of Nevada under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The court must weigh which primary factors?

Convenience of parties and witnesses, and the interest of justice (Correct answer)
Filing fees, docket congestion only in transferee court, and plaintiff's convenience
Amount in controversy, nature of claims, and parties' citizenship
Plaintiff's choice of forum, defendant's financial resources, and case complexity

Correct answer: Convenience of parties and witnesses, and the interest of justice

Section 1404(a) permits transfer for convenience of parties and witnesses, and in the interest of justice, with plaintiff's choice of forum given significant weight.

Question 19: A shareholder derivative suit is brought on behalf of a corporation. Which of the following prerequisites must ordinarily be satisfied?

The shareholder must make a demand on the board or plead why demand is excused (Correct answer)
The shareholder must own a majority of the corporation's outstanding shares
The shareholder must have been a shareholder at the time the claim arose and at the time of suit
The shareholder must first obtain a court order before notifying the corporation

Correct answer: The shareholder must make a demand on the board or plead why demand is excused

A shareholder derivative plaintiff must ordinarily make a pre-suit demand on the board to address the wrong or allege facts showing demand is futile (excused).

Question 20: A decedent dies intestate survived by a spouse and two children from a prior relationship. How does Oregon distribute the intestate estate?

Equally divided among the spouse and two children in three equal shares
Entirely to the surviving spouse
One-half to the surviving spouse and one-half equally to the two children (Correct answer)
One-third to the surviving spouse and two-thirds equally to the two children

Correct answer: One-half to the surviving spouse and one-half equally to the two children

When the decedent's surviving children are not children of the surviving spouse, Oregon splits the estate: one-half to the spouse and one-half to the children.

Question 21: What is the difference between a joint tenancy and a tenancy in common?

Tenancy in common requires equal shares
Joint tenancy is only for married couples
They are identical forms of co-ownership
Joint tenancy includes right of survivorship; tenancy in common allows inheritance by heirs (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Joint tenancy includes right of survivorship; tenancy in common allows inheritance by heirs

Joint tenancy features the right of survivorship (the surviving tenant inherits), while tenancy in common allows each co-owner to pass their share to heirs.

Question 22: In Oregon, the instrument most commonly used to secure a real estate loan is:

A deed of trust conveying title to a neutral trustee (Correct answer)
A UCC-1 financing statement filed with the Secretary of State
A mortgage creating a lien in favor of the lender
A land contract retaining title in the seller until payoff

Correct answer: A deed of trust conveying title to a neutral trustee

Oregon primarily uses deeds of trust (trust deeds) under the Oregon Trust Deed Act (ORS Chapter 86), which involves a trustor, a trustee holding title, and a beneficiary lender.

Question 23: Shareholders of an Oregon corporation vote to ratify an interested director transaction. The effect of shareholder ratification is:

No effect — only disinterested director approval can cleanse an interested transaction
The interested director is automatically indemnified for all losses from the transaction
The burden shifts to the challenger to show the transaction was unfair to the corporation (Correct answer)
The transaction becomes completely immune from any legal challenge

Correct answer: The burden shifts to the challenger to show the transaction was unfair to the corporation

Informed shareholder ratification shifts the burden to the challenger to prove the transaction was unfair, but does not grant absolute immunity from challenge.

Question 24: When can a party file a motion for a new trial in Oregon?

Within 30 days after the judgment is entered (Correct answer)
Within 10 days after the verdict is rendered
Within 60 days after the trial concludes
Within 90 days after the judgment is entered

Correct answer: Within 30 days after the judgment is entered

In Oregon, a party must file a motion for a new trial within 30 days after the judgment is entered. This deadline is set by the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure to provide a specific window for challenging the trial's outcome based on legal errors, newly discovered evidence, or other grounds that warrant a retrial. Missing this deadline typically waives the right to seek a new trial.

Question 25: Under Oregon's Tort Claims Act (ORS 30.260 et seq.), what is the general notice requirement for tort claims against a public body?

No notice is required — the general statute of limitations applies
Written notice must be given within 2 years of the alleged loss or injury
Oral notice to any government employee is sufficient
Written notice must be given within 180 days of the alleged loss or injury (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Written notice must be given within 180 days of the alleged loss or injury

ORS 30.275 requires claimants to give written notice to the public body within 180 days of the alleged tort, as a condition precedent to filing suit.

Question 26: Under In re Winship, the Due Process Clause requires that in any criminal prosecution the government prove:

The defendant's guilt to a mathematical or absolute certainty
The defendant's guilt by clear and convincing evidence
Every element of the charged offense by a preponderance of the evidence
Every element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Every element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt

In re Winship held that the Due Process Clause requires the prosecution to prove every element of a criminal offense beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest standard of proof in American law.

Question 27: State action is generally required for a constitutional rights claim. Which of the following is MOST likely to constitute state action?

A private business refusing service based on its owner's religious beliefs
A private university in a contract with the state to operate a public library (Correct answer)
A private employer firing an at-will employee for political views
A private homeowners association enforcing restrictive covenants

Correct answer: A private university in a contract with the state to operate a public library

The public function doctrine and entanglement doctrine find state action when a private entity performs a traditional governmental function or is so entwined with the state as to be treated as a state actor.

Question 28: Under the mailbox rule, an acceptance sent by mail is effective:

When the offeror receives and reads it
Upon proper dispatch by the offeree (Correct answer)
Only if mail was specified as an accepted medium
When the offeror acknowledges receipt

Correct answer: Upon proper dispatch by the offeree

The mailbox rule makes acceptance effective upon dispatch, forming a contract even before the offeror receives the acceptance.

Question 29: After a witness is impeached with a prior inconsistent statement, the proponent seeks to rehabilitate the witness with a prior consistent statement predating any motive to fabricate. The court should:

Admit it only as non-hearsay for the limited purpose of credibility, not for its truth
Admit it; prior consistent statements rebutting a charge of fabrication are admissible under OEC 801(4)(a)(B) (Correct answer)
Exclude it; prior consistent statements are always hearsay and inadmissible
Exclude it because rehabilitation is never permitted through extrinsic evidence

Correct answer: Admit it; prior consistent statements rebutting a charge of fabrication are admissible under OEC 801(4)(a)(B)

Under OEC 801(4)(a)(B), a prior consistent statement is admissible as non-hearsay to rebut a charge of recent fabrication or improper motive when made before the alleged motive arose.

Question 30: Which of the following motions is used to challenge the legal sufficiency of the opposing party's pleading?

Motion for a More Definite Statement
Motion for Summary Judgment
Motion to Dismiss (Correct answer)
Motion to Strike

Correct answer: Motion to Dismiss

A Motion to Dismiss is the appropriate procedural tool used to challenge the legal sufficiency of an opposing party's pleading, such as a complaint. This motion asserts that even if all the facts alleged in the pleading are true, they do not establish a valid legal claim or defense. It seeks to have the case or a specific claim thrown out before trial due to a legal defect.

Question 31: A limited partner who participates in control of the partnership's business under the Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (RULPA) risks:

Loss of the limited partner's economic interest in the partnership
Criminal penalties under Oregon securities law
Personal liability only to creditors who reasonably believed the limited partner was a general partner (Correct answer)
Unlimited personal liability to all partnership creditors

Correct answer: Personal liability only to creditors who reasonably believed the limited partner was a general partner

Under RULPA, a limited partner who participates in control is liable only to those third parties who reasonably believed the limited partner was a general partner.

Question 32: What standard of review applies to agency legal interpretations?

Courts always conduct de novo review of legal questions
Courts may defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes they administer (Correct answer)
Agencies have absolute final say on all legal interpretations
Only the Supreme Court can review agency legal interpretations

Correct answer: Courts may defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes they administer

Courts may give deference to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute it administers, though the level of deference depends on factors like the formality of the interpretation.

Question 33: A nephew promises to refrain from drinking alcohol for one year in exchange for his uncle's promise to pay $5,000. The nephew fully performs and the uncle refuses to pay. Is the uncle's promise enforceable?

No, because moral obligations cannot constitute consideration
Yes, because forbearing from a legal right is valid consideration (Correct answer)
Yes, but only if the promise was in writing
No, because the nephew only gave up a personal vice

Correct answer: Yes, because forbearing from a legal right is valid consideration

Forbearance from any legal right, including consumption of alcohol, constitutes valid consideration for a promise.

Question 34: A party calls the opposing spouse to testify about a private conversation the couple had at home. The testifying spouse is willing to testify. Under Oregon law, which privilege applies?

The marital communications privilege, which either spouse may invoke to protect confidential marital communications (Correct answer)
The testimonial privilege, which the party-spouse may invoke to prevent any testimony
No privilege applies because Oregon abolished spousal privileges
The testimonial privilege, which only the witness-spouse holds and may waive

Correct answer: The marital communications privilege, which either spouse may invoke to protect confidential marital communications

Oregon's marital communications privilege (OEC 505) protects confidential communications between spouses; either spouse may claim it to bar disclosure.

Question 35: A defendant removes a state court case to federal court. Plaintiff moves to remand, arguing removal was untimely. When must a defendant file a notice of removal based on diversity jurisdiction?

Within 60 days of service of the complaint
Within 30 days of service of the initial pleading or amended pleading making the case removable (Correct answer)
Any time before trial if jurisdiction existed at filing
Within 20 days of service of the complaint

Correct answer: Within 30 days of service of the initial pleading or amended pleading making the case removable

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), a defendant must remove within 30 days of receiving the initial pleading or a later pleading that first makes the case removable.

Question 36: Which type of contract is governed by UCC Article 2 rather than common law?

A contract to paint a house
A lease of commercial real property
A contract for legal services
A contract to sell 500 office chairs (Correct answer)

Correct answer: A contract to sell 500 office chairs

UCC Article 2 governs contracts for the sale of goods, such as office chairs, not service or real property contracts.

Question 37: A shareholder who dissents from a merger and properly perfects appraisal rights is entitled to:

Block the merger from proceeding until fair value is determined
Receive the fair value of shares determined by the court, not the merger price (Correct answer)
Sue the surviving corporation for fraud regardless of the merger's fairness
Receive the merger consideration plus a 10% premium mandated by statute

Correct answer: Receive the fair value of shares determined by the court, not the merger price

A shareholder who perfects appraisal rights is entitled to court-determined fair value of shares as of the merger date, which may differ from the merger consideration.

Question 38: What protections does the Equal Protection Clause provide?

It prohibits states from denying any person within their jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws (Correct answer)
It guarantees equal income for all citizens
It requires identical treatment in all circumstances regardless of differences
It only applies to racial discrimination

Correct answer: It prohibits states from denying any person within their jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits arbitrary government discrimination, requiring similarly situated persons to be treated alike under the law.

Question 39: What is joint and several liability?

Only the primary defendant is liable
Each defendant pays only their proportional share
Liability is split equally among all parties
Each defendant can be held liable for the entire amount of damages regardless of their individual fault percentage (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Each defendant can be held liable for the entire amount of damages regardless of their individual fault percentage

Under joint and several liability, each defendant is independently responsible for the full amount of damages, allowing the plaintiff to collect the entire judgment from any one defendant.

Question 40: Under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, when the government physically occupies private property even briefly or on a small scale, it is considered a:

Per se taking requiring just compensation (Correct answer)
Regulatory taking requiring Penn Central balancing
Temporary taking exempt from compensation
Non-compensable exercise of the police power

Correct answer: Per se taking requiring just compensation

A permanent physical occupation of private property, however minor, constitutes a per se taking under Loretto v. Teleprompter, requiring the government to pay just compensation.

Question 41: A defendant punches a victim intending only minor injury, but the victim dies. Under the MPC, the most likely charge is:

Negligent homicide
Reckless homicide manifesting extreme indifference to human life (Correct answer)
Knowing murder
Purposeful murder

Correct answer: Reckless homicide manifesting extreme indifference to human life

Under the MPC, a reckless killing manifesting extreme indifference to human life constitutes murder even without specific intent to kill.

Question 42: Which of the following best describes the fiduciary duties owed among general partners to each other?

Duties of loyalty and care analogous to those owed by corporate directors (Correct answer)
Duties are defined entirely by contract with no default rules
A duty of loyalty only, but no duty of care
No fiduciary duties exist because partners are independent contractors

Correct answer: Duties of loyalty and care analogous to those owed by corporate directors

General partners owe each other duties of loyalty and care similar to those applied in the corporate context, as codified in UPA (1997).

Question 43: Plaintiff moves for summary judgment under FRCP 56. The moving party bears the initial burden of showing what?

That judgment for the movant is certain as a matter of law
That the non-moving party cannot produce any evidence at trial
That the non-moving party has failed to respond to discovery requests
That there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law (Correct answer)

Correct answer: That there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law

Under FRCP 56(a), summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Question 44: A manager-managed Oregon LLC defaults to which governance structure for decisions outside the ordinary course of business?

No special approval needed — managers have plenary authority
Approval by a majority-in-interest of the members (Correct answer)
Approval by the designated managing member alone
Approval by all managers acting unanimously

Correct answer: Approval by a majority-in-interest of the members

In a manager-managed LLC, extraordinary matters outside ordinary business typically require member approval by a majority interest, not manager action alone.

Question 45: A defendant's expert witness is qualified in biomechanics and proposes to testify about the forces involved in a car crash. The opposing party argues the expert's report lacks peer-reviewed support. The court's role as gatekeeper under OEC 702 is to:

Defer entirely to the jury to assess the expert's credibility without pretrial screening
Exclude the testimony; peer-reviewed publication is mandatory for scientific expert testimony
Evaluate whether the expert's principles and methods are reliable, considering factors including peer review (Correct answer)
Admit the testimony as long as the expert holds an advanced degree in a relevant field

Correct answer: Evaluate whether the expert's principles and methods are reliable, considering factors including peer review

Under OEC 702, the court acts as gatekeeper and evaluates the reliability of the expert's methodology; peer review is one factor but not a mandatory requirement.

Question 46: The 'irresistible impulse' test for insanity holds that a defendant is not responsible if:

The defendant lacked substantial capacity to conform to law
The defendant did not know the act was wrong
The defendant suffered from any severe mental disorder
The defendant knew the act was wrong but could not control his conduct (Correct answer)

Correct answer: The defendant knew the act was wrong but could not control his conduct

The irresistible impulse test adds a volitional prong: the defendant may have known right from wrong but was unable to control his behavior.

Question 47: In a negligence case, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant's breach was the 'cause-in-fact' of the injury. Which test is primarily used in Oregon for this element?

The 'substantial factor' test exclusively
The 'foreseeability' test alone
The 'risk-utility' balancing test
The 'but-for' test, with the substantial factor test applied when multiple sufficient causes exist (Correct answer)

Correct answer: The 'but-for' test, with the substantial factor test applied when multiple sufficient causes exist

Oregon applies the 'but-for' test as the primary cause-in-fact standard, reserving the substantial factor test for cases involving concurrent sufficient causes.

Question 48: An Oregon attorney discovers mid-case that her client intends to commit perjury. What is the attorney's proper course of action?

Counsel the client against it; if client persists, the attorney must disclose to the tribunal (Correct answer)
Allow the testimony since the attorney cannot breach client confidentiality
Inform opposing counsel immediately
Withdraw from the case without explanation

Correct answer: Counsel the client against it; if client persists, the attorney must disclose to the tribunal

Oregon RPC 3.3 requires the attorney to counsel against perjury and, if the client persists, to disclose the false testimony to the tribunal.

Question 49: A corporation's board of directors adopts a resolution authorizing a major asset sale. A shareholder argues the board lacked authority because shareholders did not approve it. Under the Oregon Business Corporation Act, shareholder approval of a major asset sale is generally:

Not required — the board has sole authority over all asset dispositions
Required only if the corporation is publicly traded
Required for a sale of substantially all assets outside the ordinary course of business (Correct answer)
Required only if the sale involves more than 50% of the corporation's assets

Correct answer: Required for a sale of substantially all assets outside the ordinary course of business

Oregon follows the MBCA rule requiring shareholder approval for a sale of substantially all assets outside the ordinary course of business.

Question 50: In a short-form merger where a parent corporation owns 90% or more of a subsidiary, Oregon law generally:

Prohibits mergers until the parent owns 100% of the subsidiary
Requires approval by a majority of the subsidiary's minority shareholders only
Permits the merger without a vote of the subsidiary's shareholders, but dissenting shareholders retain appraisal rights (Correct answer)
Requires a shareholder vote of the subsidiary's minority shareholders to proceed

Correct answer: Permits the merger without a vote of the subsidiary's shareholders, but dissenting shareholders retain appraisal rights

Short-form mergers do not require a shareholder vote of the subsidiary, but minority shareholders who dissent are entitled to seek appraisal and receive fair value.

Question 51: A criminal defendant invokes his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent after being given Miranda warnings. At trial, the prosecutor comments on the defendant's silence. Under Doyle v. Ohio, this comment is:

Permissible only if the defendant testifies at trial
Permissible as relevant evidence of consciousness of guilt
Impermissible because post-Miranda silence cannot be used for impeachment (Correct answer)
Impermissible only if the comment is made during closing argument

Correct answer: Impermissible because post-Miranda silence cannot be used for impeachment

Doyle v. Ohio held that using a defendant's post-Miranda silence for impeachment violates due process because Miranda warnings implicitly assure suspects that silence will not be used against them.

Question 52: Under UCC §2-201, which exception satisfies the Statute of Frauds for a $1,000 goods contract without a signed writing?

A written confirmation sent by one merchant to another that is not objected to within 10 days (Correct answer)
Witnesses to the oral agreement
The seller's standard industry practice of oral contracting
Market price evidence confirming the agreed amount

Correct answer: A written confirmation sent by one merchant to another that is not objected to within 10 days

The merchant confirmation rule satisfies the UCC SOF when a written confirmation is sent between merchants and the recipient fails to object within 10 days.

Question 53: When may character evidence be used to prove conduct?

Character evidence is always admissible to prove conduct
Character evidence is never admissible in any case
Only the prosecution may introduce character evidence
In criminal cases, the defendant may offer evidence of pertinent good character traits (Correct answer)

Correct answer: In criminal cases, the defendant may offer evidence of pertinent good character traits

In criminal cases, the defendant may offer evidence of relevant good character traits. The prosecution cannot initiate character evidence but may rebut once the defendant opens the door.

Question 54: A shooting victim, believing she is about to die, tells a bystander, 'Jake shot me.' She then recovers and refuses to testify. The prosecution offers the out-of-court statement. Which exception best applies?

Former testimony, because she is unavailable
Present sense impression, because it described a current condition
Excited utterance, because she was under stress
Dying declaration, if the declarant believed death was imminent (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Dying declaration, if the declarant believed death was imminent

A dying declaration requires that the declarant believed death was imminent when making the statement; the declarant need not actually die for the exception to apply in civil cases, though Oregon limits it to homicide and civil proceedings.

Question 55: A tenant in common seeks to end co-ownership because the other co-tenant refuses to sell. The most appropriate remedy is:

Quiet title action
Unlawful detainer action
Partition (Correct answer)
Ejectment

Correct answer: Partition

Partition is the judicial remedy that dissolves concurrent ownership, either by physical division (partition in kind) or by a forced sale with proceeds divided among co-owners.

Question 56: Under Oregon law, which of the following is a valid defense to a strict liability products claim?

The defendant did not manufacture the product
Contributory negligence of the plaintiff
The product complied with industry standards at the time of manufacture
Assumption of the risk by knowingly using a defective product (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Assumption of the risk by knowingly using a defective product

Assumption of the risk — where the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily uses a product they know to be defective — is a complete or partial defense to strict products liability in Oregon.

Question 57: Following Ramos v. Louisiana (2020), which of the following is TRUE regarding jury unanimity in criminal trials?

Federal courts must use unanimous verdicts while state courts retain discretion
The Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous jury verdict for conviction of any serious criminal offense (Correct answer)
States may still permit non-unanimous verdicts for non-capital felonies
Non-unanimous verdicts are permissible only when the defendant waives the unanimity right

Correct answer: The Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous jury verdict for conviction of any serious criminal offense

Ramos v. Louisiana held the Sixth Amendment unanimity requirement applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, directly invalidating Oregon's longstanding non-unanimous verdict practice.

Question 58: Police arrest a suspect without a warrant inside his home. Under Payton v. New York, this warrantless home arrest is:

Constitutional if the crime is a felony
Unconstitutional only if the suspect was sleeping
Constitutional if officers have probable cause
Unconstitutional absent exigent circumstances or consent (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Unconstitutional absent exigent circumstances or consent

Payton v. New York held that absent exigent circumstances or consent, the Fourth Amendment prohibits warrantless, nonconsensual entry into a suspect's home to make a felony arrest.

Question 59: A plaintiff brings a negligence per se claim in Oregon. What must the plaintiff show?

That the defendant's conduct was both illegal and outrageous
That the defendant violated a statute designed to protect against the type of harm suffered by the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff belongs to the protected class (Correct answer)
That the defendant acted with gross negligence in violating the statute
Only that the defendant violated a statute

Correct answer: That the defendant violated a statute designed to protect against the type of harm suffered by the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff belongs to the protected class

Negligence per se requires that the violated statute was intended to protect the class of persons to which the plaintiff belongs against the type of harm that occurred.

Question 60: Congress passes a law creating an independent agency whose officers may only be removed by the President for cause. Under Morrison v. Olson and Seila Law, this structure is:

Unconstitutional in all cases because the President must have plenary removal power
Unconstitutional only if the agency exercises legislative power
Constitutional for multimember commissions but potentially unconstitutional for a single director (Correct answer)
Constitutional for all agencies performing quasi-judicial functions

Correct answer: Constitutional for multimember commissions but potentially unconstitutional for a single director

Seila Law held that for-cause removal protection is constitutional for multimember commissions but unconstitutional when applied to a single director of a powerful agency, because it impermissibly limits presidential control.

Question 61: The Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause, as clarified in Miranda v. Arizona, requires police to advise a suspect in custody of their rights before:

Custodial interrogation, meaning questioning after formal arrest or equivalent restraint (Correct answer)
Presenting the suspect at a lineup for eyewitness identification
Booking procedures at the police station following arrest
Any encounter between law enforcement and a citizen on public streets

Correct answer: Custodial interrogation, meaning questioning after formal arrest or equivalent restraint

Miranda warnings are required only before custodial interrogation — questioning of a person who has been arrested or whose freedom of movement has been significantly curtailed.

Question 62: A defendant is tried twice for the same offense after the first jury was discharged without rendering a verdict because the jury was deadlocked. The second prosecution violates:

Neither the Double Jeopardy Clause nor Due Process, because manifest necessity justified the mistrial (Correct answer)
The Due Process Clause but not Double Jeopardy
The Double Jeopardy Clause, because jeopardy attached at the first trial
The Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial

Correct answer: Neither the Double Jeopardy Clause nor Due Process, because manifest necessity justified the mistrial

A hung jury constitutes manifest necessity for declaring a mistrial, and retrial after a hung jury does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Question 63: Under Terry v. Ohio, a brief investigatory stop and pat-down is constitutionally permissible when:

An officer has a hunch based on experience that a crime is occurring
An officer observes the suspect in a high-crime area for at least ten minutes
An officer has reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity and reason to believe the suspect is armed (Correct answer)
The suspect refuses to identify themselves when an officer approaches

Correct answer: An officer has reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity and reason to believe the suspect is armed

Terry permits brief investigatory stops based on reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity, and a limited pat-down when officers reasonably believe the suspect may be armed and dangerous.

Question 64: Which feature is MOST characteristic of a joint tenancy as opposed to a tenancy in common?

A joint tenancy may only be created between spouses
Upon one co-tenant's death, the survivor(s) take the decedent's share automatically (Correct answer)
Each co-tenant may freely devise their share by will
Each co-tenant holds a distinct, separately transferable fractional interest

Correct answer: Upon one co-tenant's death, the survivor(s) take the decedent's share automatically

The defining feature of joint tenancy is the right of survivorship — when one joint tenant dies, their interest passes automatically to the surviving joint tenant(s), bypassing probate.

Question 65: The jury returns a verdict for plaintiff. Defendant did not move for JMOL under FRCP 50(a) during trial. Can defendant now move for renewed JMOL under FRCP 50(b) after the verdict?

Yes, but only if defendant also simultaneously files a motion for new trial
Yes; a post-verdict JMOL may be filed regardless of whether a pre-verdict motion was made
No; defendant's only remedy is an appeal to the circuit court
No; a party must have moved for JMOL under Rule 50(a) during trial to renew under Rule 50(b) (Correct answer)

Correct answer: No; a party must have moved for JMOL under Rule 50(a) during trial to renew under Rule 50(b)

FRCP 50(b) requires a prior Rule 50(a) motion during trial as a prerequisite; without it, the renewed JMOL motion is procedurally barred.

Question 66: The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibits which of the following?

Retrying a defendant after a hung jury deadlocks without a verdict
Prosecuting a defendant in both state and federal court for the same conduct
Imposing a harsher sentence after a successful appeal and retrial
A second trial for the same offense after an acquittal in the first trial (Correct answer)

Correct answer: A second trial for the same offense after an acquittal in the first trial

Double jeopardy absolutely bars retrial after an acquittal — jeopardy attaches at acquittal and the prosecution may not take another bite at the apple regardless of trial errors.

Question 67: The automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement allows police to search a vehicle without a warrant when:

The vehicle is parked in a public location visible to the officer
The driver is arrested and the vehicle is searched incident to arrest
There is probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime (Correct answer)
The vehicle is stopped for a traffic violation

Correct answer: There is probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime

Under Carroll v. United States, the automobile exception applies when officers have probable cause to believe a vehicle contains contraband or evidence, given the vehicle's inherent mobility and reduced privacy expectations.

Question 68: A contract obligates a buyer to pay 'upon delivery of the goods.' Delivery is best classified as:

A condition subsequent that discharges the duty to pay
A warranty that the goods will conform to the contract
A condition precedent that must occur before the duty to pay arises (Correct answer)
A concurrent condition requiring simultaneous exchange

Correct answer: A condition precedent that must occur before the duty to pay arises

A condition precedent is an event that must occur before a party's contractual duty to perform becomes due.

Question 69: A plaintiff sues a foreign corporation in Oregon federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. The corporation has a registered agent in Oregon but conducts no other business there. Which basis of personal jurisdiction applies?

General jurisdiction based on principal place of business
Specific jurisdiction based on minimum contacts
Consent jurisdiction based on registered agent designation (Correct answer)
Tag jurisdiction based on physical presence

Correct answer: Consent jurisdiction based on registered agent designation

Appointing a registered agent in a state constitutes consent to personal jurisdiction in that state for service of process purposes.

Question 70: Under Oregon's rules, when must a party file a motion for summary judgment?

Any time during the trial
After the close of discovery but before trial (Correct answer)
Only during trial
Before the discovery process begins

Correct answer: After the close of discovery but before trial

Under Oregon's rules of civil procedure, a party typically files a motion for summary judgment after the close of discovery but before the trial begins. This timing allows parties to gather all relevant evidence through discovery and then argue that there are no genuine issues of material fact, entitling them to judgment as a matter of law. Filing too early might be premature, and too late would disrupt trial proceedings.

Question 71: Solicitation is complete at the moment:

The defendant and solicitee form a written plan
The solicitee agrees to commit the crime
The solicitee takes a substantial step toward the crime
The defendant asks another to commit a crime with intent that it be committed (Correct answer)

Correct answer: The defendant asks another to commit a crime with intent that it be committed

Solicitation is complete upon communicating the request with criminal intent, regardless of whether the solicitee agrees or acts.

Question 72: Under Craig v. Boren, a state law setting different legal drinking ages for men and women would be subject to which standard?

Intermediate scrutiny, because the classification is based on sex (Correct answer)
Rational basis, since alcohol regulation is a traditional state police power
Strict scrutiny, because gender is a suspect classification like race
No constitutional scrutiny, as age and gender regulations are committed to legislative discretion

Correct answer: Intermediate scrutiny, because the classification is based on sex

Sex-based classifications receive intermediate scrutiny under Craig v. Boren, requiring the government to show the classification is substantially related to an important government interest.

Question 73: Under common law, larceny is defined as:

Obtaining property by creating a false impression
Breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit a felony
Fraudulent conversion of property lawfully obtained
Trespassory taking and carrying away of another's personal property with intent to permanently deprive (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Trespassory taking and carrying away of another's personal property with intent to permanently deprive

Common law larceny requires a trespassory taking and asportation of another's personal property with specific intent to permanently deprive the owner.

Question 74: A grantor conveys Blackacre 'to A so long as the land is used for agricultural purposes.' This language creates:

A fee simple subject to condition subsequent with a right of entry in the grantor
A fee simple determinable with a possibility of reverter in the grantor (Correct answer)
A life estate in A measured by A's life
A fee simple absolute in A

Correct answer: A fee simple determinable with a possibility of reverter in the grantor

The durational language 'so long as' creates a fee simple determinable, which automatically terminates and reverts to the grantor upon cessation of the stated use, without any need for re-entry.

Question 75: What is the Oregon constitutional provision that guarantees the right to a fair trial?

Article I, Section 11 (Correct answer)
Article I, Section 11
Article I, Section 14
Article I, Section 13

Correct answer: Article I, Section 11

Article I, Section 11 of the Oregon Constitution guarantees the right to a fair trial for criminal defendants. This section outlines several fundamental protections, including the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to an impartial jury, the right to confront witnesses, and the right to counsel. These provisions collectively ensure due process and a just legal proceeding for those accused of crimes in Oregon.

Question 76: What is the standard of proof required for a conviction in a criminal case in Oregon?

Beyond a reasonable doubt (Correct answer)
Probable cause
Clear and convincing evidence
Preponderance of the evidence

Correct answer: Beyond a reasonable doubt

In a criminal case in Oregon, as in all U.S. jurisdictions, the prosecution must prove the defendant's guilt 'beyond a reasonable doubt.' This is the highest standard of proof in the legal system, signifying that the evidence presented must be so convincing that no reasonable person would question the defendant's guilt. This high standard is a cornerstone of due process, protecting individuals from wrongful conviction.

Question 77: A state law grants in-state businesses a 5% tax preference over out-of-state competitors bidding on government contracts. Under the Dormant Commerce Clause, this law is most likely:

Constitutional as a market participant exception since the state is the buyer (Correct answer)
Constitutional because states may prefer their own citizens in government contracting
Unconstitutional because it discriminates against interstate commerce
Unconstitutional only if out-of-state businesses can prove discriminatory intent

Correct answer: Constitutional as a market participant exception since the state is the buyer

The market participant exception allows states to favor in-state firms when acting as a buyer or seller in the market rather than as a regulator, so a state may prefer in-state bidders for government contracts.

Question 78: Under the UCC perfect tender rule (§2-601), a buyer may reject a shipment of goods if:

The defect is substantial and materially impairs the value of the goods
Only the quantity delivered is incorrect
The goods fail to conform to the contract in any respect (Correct answer)
The goods cannot be repaired within a reasonable time

Correct answer: The goods fail to conform to the contract in any respect

The perfect tender rule allows rejection if goods or delivery fail to conform to the contract in any way, even a minor defect.

Question 79: Under Oregon law, a landowner owes what duty of care to a licensee (social guest)?

A duty only to refrain from willful or wanton harm
A duty to warn of known dangerous conditions that the licensee is unlikely to discover (Correct answer)
The same duty owed to invitees — to inspect and make the property safe
No duty of care whatsoever

Correct answer: A duty to warn of known dangerous conditions that the licensee is unlikely to discover

A landowner owes a licensee a duty to warn of known dangerous conditions not obvious to the licensee, but need not inspect for unknown dangers.

Question 80: The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, applicable to the federal government, guarantees substantive due process. Fundamental rights under this doctrine are subject to:

Intermediate scrutiny balancing liberty against government regulation
Strict scrutiny requiring a compelling interest and narrow tailoring (Correct answer)
Only procedural protections through notice and a hearing
Rational basis review since the Constitution does not enumerate them

Correct answer: Strict scrutiny requiring a compelling interest and narrow tailoring

Substantive due process requires strict scrutiny for laws infringing fundamental rights, meaning the government must show a compelling interest pursued by narrowly tailored means.

Question 81: At common law, burglary requires breaking and entering a dwelling house:

During daytime, with intent to commit a misdemeanor
At nighttime, with intent to commit a felony therein (Correct answer)
With any force, with intent to commit theft
At any time, with intent to commit any crime therein

Correct answer: At nighttime, with intent to commit a felony therein

Common law burglary requires nighttime breaking and entering of another's dwelling with intent to commit a felony inside.

Question 82: How does the Pinkerton doctrine differ from the MPC approach to co-conspirator liability?

The MPC extends liability to all foreseeable crimes; Pinkerton limits it to planned crimes
Pinkerton holds co-conspirators vicariously liable for each other's crimes; the MPC generally does not (Correct answer)
The MPC imposes strict liability on all conspirators; Pinkerton does not
Pinkerton requires an overt act; the MPC does not

Correct answer: Pinkerton holds co-conspirators vicariously liable for each other's crimes; the MPC generally does not

Under Pinkerton, co-conspirators are automatically liable for crimes committed by each other in furtherance of the conspiracy; the MPC rejects this vicarious liability.

Question 83: Under Oregon law, a defendant is strictly liable for harm caused by 'abnormally dangerous activities.' Which of the following factors is LEAST relevant to determining whether an activity is abnormally dangerous?

The degree of risk of harm to persons or property
Whether the activity is a matter of common usage
The defendant's subjective intent to harm others (Correct answer)
Whether the activity can be performed safely with reasonable precautions

Correct answer: The defendant's subjective intent to harm others

Strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities does not depend on the defendant's intent; it focuses on the nature of the activity's risk and social utility.

Question 84: What is consideration in contract formation?

A required waiting period before signing
The amount of money involved in the deal
The physical contract document
A bargained-for exchange of legal value between the parties (Correct answer)

Correct answer: A bargained-for exchange of legal value between the parties

Consideration is the legal concept requiring each party to give something of value — a promise, performance, or forbearance — in exchange for the other's promise or performance.

Question 85: A plaintiff claims intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) in Oregon. Which element is REQUIRED?

Physical manifestation of emotional distress
The defendant's conduct must also constitute an independent tort
A pre-existing emotional or psychological vulnerability
Extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant intended to cause severe emotional distress (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant intended to cause severe emotional distress

IIED in Oregon requires extreme and outrageous conduct, intent to cause or reckless disregard of the probability of causing severe emotional distress, and resulting severe emotional distress.

Question 86: The cy pres doctrine permits a court to modify a charitable trust when:

Trust assets fall below a minimum threshold specified in the trust instrument
The trust's specific charitable purpose has become illegal, impossible, or impractical to fulfill (Correct answer)
The trustee commits a breach of fiduciary duty that damages the trust
All income beneficiaries consent to changing the trust's stated purpose

Correct answer: The trust's specific charitable purpose has become illegal, impossible, or impractical to fulfill

Cy pres allows a court to substitute a similar charitable purpose when the original purpose becomes illegal, impossible, or impractical, rather than allowing the charitable trust to fail.

Question 87: A criminal defendant seeks to impeach a prosecution witness with the witness's 12-year-old felony conviction for embezzlement. The court must consider:

Whether the witness has been pardoned, which automatically bars admission
Probative value versus prejudice, including whether the conviction is more than 10 years old under OEC 609 (Correct answer)
Whether the conviction involved dishonesty or false statement; if so, it is automatically admissible
Only whether the conviction is for a felony, regardless of time elapsed

Correct answer: Probative value versus prejudice, including whether the conviction is more than 10 years old under OEC 609

Under OEC 609, convictions more than 10 years old require that probative value substantially outweigh prejudicial effect before admission.

Question 88: A car dealer falsely tells a buyer the vehicle has never been in an accident, knowing this is false. The buyer purchases and later discovers the truth. The buyer may avoid the contract based on:

Constructive fraud due to the dealer's superior knowledge
Mutual mistake about the car's condition
Fraudulent misrepresentation inducing assent (Correct answer)
Material breach of an express warranty

Correct answer: Fraudulent misrepresentation inducing assent

Fraudulent misrepresentation occurs when a party knowingly makes a false statement of material fact intending to induce the other party's reliance.

Question 89: Which factor is MOST determinative in deciding whether personal property has become a fixture?

The objective intent of the annexor, as evidenced by method of attachment and adaptation (Correct answer)
Whether the seller disclosed the item in the property listing agreement
The age of the item at the time it was attached to the realty
The monetary value of the item relative to the real property

Correct answer: The objective intent of the annexor, as evidenced by method of attachment and adaptation

Courts weigh method of annexation, adaptation to the realty, and — most critically — the objective intent of the person who attached the item, to determine whether personal property has become a fixture.

Question 90: The necessity (choice of evils) defense is unavailable when:

The threat arose from natural forces rather than human actors
The harm caused is less severe than the harm avoided
No reasonable legal alternative existed
The defendant was at fault in creating the emergency situation (Correct answer)

Correct answer: The defendant was at fault in creating the emergency situation

Necessity is unavailable if the defendant was responsible for bringing about the very emergency that necessitated the choice of evils.

Question 91: Defendant asserts a counterclaim against Plaintiff arising from a completely unrelated business dispute in a federal diversity case. Under FRCP 13, this counterclaim is best characterized as:

Compulsory, because it must be brought now or waived
Compulsory, because it involves the same parties
Permissive, because it does not arise from the same transaction or occurrence as Plaintiff's claim (Correct answer)
Permissive, but only if it independently satisfies subject matter jurisdiction

Correct answer: Permissive, because it does not arise from the same transaction or occurrence as Plaintiff's claim

FRCP 13(b) defines a permissive counterclaim as any claim not arising from the same transaction or occurrence; unlike compulsory counterclaims, it is not waived if omitted.

Question 92: Under Oregon RPC 1.16, an attorney may withdraw from representation WITHOUT court permission when:

The case becomes more difficult than anticipated
The opposing party is represented by a friend of the attorney
The client persists in a course of action the attorney reasonably believes is criminal or fraudulent (Correct answer)
The attorney receives a better paying client

Correct answer: The client persists in a course of action the attorney reasonably believes is criminal or fraudulent

Oregon RPC 1.16(b)(2) permits withdrawal when the client insists on action the attorney reasonably believes is criminal or fraudulent.

Question 93: When an estate has insufficient assets to satisfy all bequests, in what order does abatement generally occur?

All bequests abate proportionally regardless of type
Specific bequests first, then demonstrative, then general, then residuary
Charitable bequests are always exempt from abatement
Residuary bequests first, then general, then demonstrative, then specific bequests last (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Residuary bequests first, then general, then demonstrative, then specific bequests last

Abatement reduces bequests in reverse order of specificity: residuary first, general second, demonstrative third, and specific bequests are reduced last.

Question 94: A defendant punches the plaintiff in the face. The plaintiff sues for battery. The defendant claims they were defending themselves. For self-defense to succeed in Oregon, the defendant must show:

The plaintiff first used deadly force
They reasonably believed they were in imminent danger of unlawful bodily harm and used proportionate force (Correct answer)
They warned the plaintiff before using force
They believed force was necessary, regardless of whether the belief was reasonable

Correct answer: They reasonably believed they were in imminent danger of unlawful bodily harm and used proportionate force

Self-defense in tort requires a reasonable belief of imminent unlawful harm and the use of proportionate force — subjective belief alone is insufficient.

Question 95: What is the Rule Against Perpetuities?

A rule against multiple mortgages on one property
A rule that limits lease terms to 99 years
A rule requiring that future interests must vest within a life in being plus 21 years (Correct answer)
A rule preventing property from being sold more than once

Correct answer: A rule requiring that future interests must vest within a life in being plus 21 years

The Rule Against Perpetuities invalidates future interests that might not vest within 21 years after the death of a measuring life in being at the creation of the interest.

Question 96: Common law extortion is best described as:

Taking property by immediate force from another's person
Receiving property knowing it was stolen
Obtaining property from another through threats (Correct answer)
Fraudulently inducing a transfer of property through deception

Correct answer: Obtaining property from another through threats

Extortion involves obtaining property through threats, which may include future threats, distinguishing it from robbery's requirement of immediate force.

Question 97: An easement appurtenant differs from an easement in gross in that an easement appurtenant:

Terminates upon the sale of the servient estate
Runs with the dominant estate and transfers automatically upon conveyance of that parcel (Correct answer)
Cannot be transferred without the express consent of the servient owner
Benefits a particular person rather than a parcel of land

Correct answer: Runs with the dominant estate and transfers automatically upon conveyance of that parcel

An easement appurtenant benefits a dominant tenement and automatically passes with any transfer of that land, while an easement in gross benefits a person or entity, not a parcel.

Question 98: What is a material breach of contract?

A breach so substantial that it excuses the non-breaching party from further performance (Correct answer)
A breach that occurs on a material (physical) object
Any minor deviation from the contract terms
A breach by a materials supplier

Correct answer: A breach so substantial that it excuses the non-breaching party from further performance

A material breach is a failure to perform a substantial part of the contract, going to the essence of the agreement and depriving the other party of the expected benefit.

Question 99: During discovery, plaintiff seeks production of internal emails between defendant corporation and its outside counsel discussing litigation strategy for the current lawsuit. Defendant asserts attorney-client privilege. Which element is most critical to evaluate?

Whether the communications were made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice and kept confidential (Correct answer)
Whether the emails were cc'd to any third-party consultants
Whether the emails were sent using the corporation's email server
Whether outside counsel billed for the emails at their standard hourly rate

Correct answer: Whether the communications were made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice and kept confidential

Attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between attorney and client made for the purpose of seeking or providing legal advice.

Question 100: What is specific performance as a contract remedy?

A penalty clause in the contract
A court order requiring the breaching party to perform their contractual obligations (Correct answer)
A monetary payment calculated at a specific rate
A performance evaluation of contract compliance

Correct answer: A court order requiring the breaching party to perform their contractual obligations

Specific performance is an equitable remedy ordering the breaching party to actually perform their obligations, typically available when monetary damages are inadequate and the subject matter is unique.

Question 101: The Establishment Clause is BEST understood to prohibit which of the following?

Religious symbols on private property visible from public streets
Any government acknowledgment of religion in public settings
Government action whose primary effect advances or inhibits religion without secular purpose (Correct answer)
Only laws that formally designate an official state church

Correct answer: Government action whose primary effect advances or inhibits religion without secular purpose

Under the Lemon test and subsequent doctrine, the Establishment Clause prohibits government action lacking a secular purpose or having the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion.

Question 102: The doctrine of tacking in adverse possession permits a claimant to:

Combine possession of non-contiguous parcels to satisfy the acreage requirement for adverse possession
Add their period of possession to that of a prior adverse possessor in privity in order to satisfy the statutory period (Correct answer)
Use a predecessor's permissive use as evidence of the claimant's hostile intent
Substitute open and notorious use for the continuity requirement during winter months

Correct answer: Add their period of possession to that of a prior adverse possessor in privity in order to satisfy the statutory period

Tacking allows an adverse possessor to add their period of possession to a prior adverse possessor's period, provided there is privity of possession between them (such as a deed or voluntary transfer of possession), to meet the statutory period.

Question 103: An expert witness proposes to testify about a new scientific technique for analyzing bloodstain patterns. Under Oregon's standard for expert testimony, the trial court should:

Apply a strict Frye general-acceptance test, excluding anything not universally accepted
Admit without inquiry because bloodstain analysis is judicially noticed as reliable
Evaluate whether the methodology is scientifically valid and reliably applied to the facts (Correct answer)
Admit the testimony if the expert has a relevant advanced degree, regardless of methodology

Correct answer: Evaluate whether the methodology is scientifically valid and reliably applied to the facts

Oregon applies a reliability-based gatekeeping standard under OEC 702, requiring the court to assess whether the expert's methodology is valid and fits the case facts.

Question 104: A state passes a law making it a crime to burn the state flag. Under Texas v. Johnson principles, this law is:

Unconstitutional only if directed at political dissent
Unconstitutional because flag burning is protected symbolic speech (Correct answer)
Constitutional because states may protect their own symbols
Constitutional as a content-neutral regulation of conduct

Correct answer: Unconstitutional because flag burning is protected symbolic speech

Following Texas v. Johnson, burning a flag as a form of political protest is protected symbolic speech under the First Amendment, and government may not prohibit it merely because it disapproves of the message.

Question 105: What is the purpose of the Administrative Procedure Act?

To create new administrative agencies
To replace all common law with statutory law
To establish procedures for agency rulemaking and adjudication, and provide for judicial review (Correct answer)
To limit the number of government regulations

Correct answer: To establish procedures for agency rulemaking and adjudication, and provide for judicial review

The APA establishes the framework for how federal agencies create rules, conduct hearings, and make decisions, while also providing citizens the right to challenge agency actions in court.

Question 106: Under Batson v. Kentucky, the Equal Protection Clause is violated when:

The composition of the seated jury does not reflect the racial makeup of the community
A prosecutor uses for-cause challenges in a racially discriminatory pattern
A prosecutor uses peremptory challenges to deliberately exclude jurors based on race (Correct answer)
A jury venire statistically underrepresents a racial group

Correct answer: A prosecutor uses peremptory challenges to deliberately exclude jurors based on race

Batson holds that purposeful racial discrimination in the use of peremptory challenges violates the Equal Protection Clause, establishing a three-step burden-shifting framework for adjudicating such claims.

Question 107: Under Oregon's Uniform Parentage Act, a person is presumed to be a parent of a child when:

They were married to the birth parent at the time of the child's birth or adoption (Correct answer)
DNA testing establishes a 90% or greater probability of biological parentage
They have lived with the child continuously for more than six months and held the child out as their own
They have provided regular financial support for the child for at least one continuous year

Correct answer: They were married to the birth parent at the time of the child's birth or adoption

Oregon's Uniform Parentage Act presumes parentage when the individual was married to the birth parent at the time of birth, codifying the traditional marital presumption of paternity.

Question 108: At the close of plaintiff's evidence in a jury trial, defendant moves for judgment as a matter of law under FRCP 50(a). The court should grant the motion if:

A reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the plaintiff (Correct answer)
Plaintiff failed to request specific jury instructions before trial
The jury appears likely to rule in plaintiff's favor based on voir dire responses
Plaintiff's expert witness testimony was admitted over defendant's objection

Correct answer: A reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the plaintiff

Under FRCP 50(a), JMOL is granted when no reasonable jury could find for the non-movant based on the evidence presented.

Question 109: Under Oregon's probate code, how long do creditors generally have to file claims after the first publication of notice to creditors?

30 days
1 year
4 months (Correct answer)
60 days

Correct answer: 4 months

Under ORS 115.005, creditors must file claims within 4 months of the first publication of notice to creditors, or within 30 days of actual notice, whichever is later.

Question 110: In a civil fraud case, plaintiff seeks to introduce evidence that defendant committed a similar fraudulent scheme five years ago. This evidence is:

Inadmissible as propensity evidence under OEC 404(a)
Inadmissible unless the prior scheme resulted in a criminal conviction
Admissible only if the defendant testifies
Admissible to show knowledge, plan, or absence of mistake under OEC 404(b) (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Admissible to show knowledge, plan, or absence of mistake under OEC 404(b)

OEC 404(b) prohibits other-acts evidence to prove character/propensity but permits it for purposes such as proving knowledge, plan, or absence of mistake.

Question 111: A public employee is fired for posting on social media about a matter of public concern during off-duty hours. Under Garcetti v. Ceballos and Pickering, the court will weigh:

Whether the employee had prior disciplinary history
Only whether the speech was made anonymously or identified
The employee's free speech interest against the government's interest in efficient workplace operations (Correct answer)
Whether the speech was on government property at the time it was made

Correct answer: The employee's free speech interest against the government's interest in efficient workplace operations

The Pickering balancing test requires courts to weigh the employee's interest in commenting on matters of public concern against the government employer's interest in promoting efficient public services.

Question 112: An attorney seeks to introduce evidence that the opposing party has liability insurance to show the party was careless because they knew they were covered. This evidence is:

Inadmissible under OEC 411 to prove negligent or wrongful conduct (Correct answer)
Admissible if the plaintiff lacks sufficient assets to satisfy a judgment
Admissible after the defendant claims they acted carefully
Admissible; insurance coverage is always relevant to the issue of negligence

Correct answer: Inadmissible under OEC 411 to prove negligent or wrongful conduct

OEC 411 prohibits evidence of liability insurance to prove that a person acted negligently or wrongfully, though it may be admissible for other purposes.

Question 113: A defendant fails to appear or respond to a complaint. The clerk enters default under FRCP 55(a). To obtain a default judgment for an unliquidated sum, plaintiff must next:

File a motion for default judgment with the court, which may hold a hearing to determine damages (Correct answer)
Move for summary judgment because default establishes all allegations
Submit an affidavit of damages to the clerk, who enters judgment automatically
Re-serve the defendant and wait another 21 days before seeking judgment

Correct answer: File a motion for default judgment with the court, which may hold a hearing to determine damages

When damages are unliquidated, FRCP 55(b)(2) requires application to the court, which may conduct a hearing to ascertain the amount of damages.

Question 114: A restaurant contracts to host an event in its banquet hall. The hall burns down due to lightning before the event. The restaurant's duty to perform is discharged by:

Impossibility of performance (Correct answer)
Frustration of purpose
Mutual mistake
Commercial impracticability

Correct answer: Impossibility of performance

Impossibility discharges contractual duties when a supervening event makes performance objectively impossible, such as destruction of the subject matter.

Question 115: Under Oregon law, which standard of care applies to a defendant who holds themselves out as having special expertise in a particular field?

A heightened strict liability standard
The reasonable person standard
The standard of a reasonably competent specialist in that field (Correct answer)
The custom of the local community only

Correct answer: The standard of a reasonably competent specialist in that field

A professional or specialist is held to the standard of a reasonably competent member of that profession or specialty.

Question 116: A consumer contract buries arbitration-only, class-action-waiver, and prohibitively high fee provisions in fine print. A court is most likely to refuse enforcement on grounds of:

The Statute of Frauds
Fraudulent misrepresentation
Failure of consideration
Unconscionability (Correct answer)

Correct answer: Unconscionability

A clause that is both procedurally unfair (buried terms, unequal bargaining) and substantively oppressive (prohibitive fees) may be voided as unconscionable.

Question 117: Which contractual duty CANNOT be delegated to a third party without the obligee's consent?

A duty to deliver standardized commercial goods
A duty to pay a monetary debt
A duty to perform routine data entry tasks
A duty requiring the unique personal skill or judgment of the original promisor (Correct answer)

Correct answer: A duty requiring the unique personal skill or judgment of the original promisor

Duties involving unique personal skill, trust, or confidence cannot be delegated without consent because the obligee bargained for that specific person's performance.

Question 118: Constructive notice in the recording system means a subsequent purchaser is legally charged with knowledge of:

Only instruments they actually read before closing
Claims that a physical inspection of the property would have disclosed
Representations made by the seller in the purchase and sale agreement
All instruments properly recorded in the chain of title, whether or not actually read (Correct answer)

Correct answer: All instruments properly recorded in the chain of title, whether or not actually read

Constructive notice is the legal imputation of knowledge of all properly recorded instruments in the chain of title, regardless of whether the subsequent purchaser actually searched or reviewed those records.

Question 119: Under Oregon law, a shareholder in a closely-held corporation who is being 'squeezed out' by majority shareholders may have a claim for:

Breach of the duty of loyalty owed by majority shareholders acting as fiduciaries (Correct answer)
No recognized claim because majority shareholders may act in self-interest
Breach of contract only if a shareholder agreement was violated
Violation of federal securities laws exclusively

Correct answer: Breach of the duty of loyalty owed by majority shareholders acting as fiduciaries

Courts in closely-held corporations often impose heightened fiduciary duties on majority shareholders, allowing squeeze-out victims to bring claims for breach of the duty of loyalty.

Question 120: An LLC member seeks to dissolve the LLC judicially in Oregon. A court may order dissolution when:

A member's capital contribution has not been fully returned after two years
It is not reasonably practicable to carry on the LLC's business in conformity with the operating agreement (Correct answer)
The member disagrees with the business strategy chosen by the majority of members
The LLC fails to hold an annual meeting of members

Correct answer: It is not reasonably practicable to carry on the LLC's business in conformity with the operating agreement

Courts may judicially dissolve an LLC when it is not reasonably practicable to carry on business in conformity with the operating agreement, such as when there is deadlock or the purpose can no longer be achieved.

Oregon Bar Exam (NextGen UBE)

The Oregon Bar Exam is a NextGen Uniform Bar Examination testing foundational legal knowledge across 8 core subject areas through standalone multiple-choice questions, integrated question sets, and performance tasks. Adopted by Oregon in July 2026, it evaluates both doctrinal knowledge and practical lawyering skills required of newly licensed attorneys.

120

Questions

180 min

Time Limit

68%

To Pass

Checking for saved progress...

Exam Rules

You can skip questions and return to them later
Flag questions for review before submitting
No feedback shown until you submit the entire exam
Unanswered questions count as wrong — answer everything
10 pretest questions are mixed in and don't affect your score
Timer auto-submits when time runs out
Your progress is auto-saved every 30 seconds