UT Bar Multistate Bar 3 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A merchant emails another merchant offering to sell 500 widgets at $10 each, stating the offer will remain open for 10 days. The offer is unsigned beyond the email signature block. Under the UCC, the offer is:
- Revocable at any time because no consideration was given
- Irrevocable for 10 days as a merchant's firm offer if the signed writing requirement is satisfied (Correct answer)
- Irrevocable for three months automatically
- Revocable because firm offers apply only to goods over $500
Correct answer: Irrevocable for 10 days as a merchant's firm offer if the signed writing requirement is satisfied
UCC 2-205 makes a merchant's signed written offer giving assurance it will be held open irrevocable without consideration for the stated time up to three months.
Question 2: At a murder trial, the defense calls a witness to testify that the day before the killing, the victim said, "I'm going to kill the defendant tomorrow." The statement is offered to show the defendant acted in self-defense. The statement is:
- Inadmissible hearsay
- Admissible under the state of mind exception to show the victim's intent (Correct answer)
- Admissible only as a dying declaration
- Inadmissible character evidence about the victim
Correct answer: Admissible under the state of mind exception to show the victim's intent
A statement of the declarant's then-existing intent is admissible under FRE 803(3) to show the victim intended to, and likely did, act aggressively.
Question 3: Congress passes a statute conditioning 5% of federal highway funds on states raising their drinking age to 21. A state challenges the law. The condition is most likely:
- Invalid because Congress cannot regulate drinking ages
- Invalid as commandeering state legislatures
- Valid as a non-coercive exercise of the spending power related to highway safety (Correct answer)
- Valid only if all states consent
Correct answer: Valid as a non-coercive exercise of the spending power related to highway safety
Under South Dakota v. Dole, Congress may attach conditions to federal funds if they are unambiguous, related to the federal interest, and not coercive.
Question 4: A tenant with two years remaining on a lease transfers "all of my remaining interest" in the premises to a friend. The friend fails to pay rent. The landlord may recover unpaid rent from:
- Only the friend, because the transfer was an assignment ending the tenant's liability
- Both the tenant on privity of contract and the friend on privity of estate (Correct answer)
- Only the tenant, because the landlord never consented
- Neither, because the transfer was invalid without landlord consent
Correct answer: Both the tenant on privity of contract and the friend on privity of estate
An assignment puts the assignee in privity of estate with the landlord while the original tenant remains liable on privity of contract absent a release.
Question 5: A plaintiff from Utah sues a Nevada corporation with its principal place of business in California in federal court for $100,000. The corporation's only contact with Utah is a single contract negotiated and performed in Utah with the plaintiff. Personal jurisdiction in Utah is most likely:
- Lacking because the corporation is not at home in Utah
- Proper as specific jurisdiction because the claim arises from the corporation's purposeful contacts with Utah (Correct answer)
- Proper as general jurisdiction based on the contract
- Lacking because corporations can only be sued where incorporated
Correct answer: Proper as specific jurisdiction because the claim arises from the corporation's purposeful contacts with Utah
Specific personal jurisdiction exists where the defendant purposefully directed activities at the forum and the claim arises out of those contacts.
Question 6: A store leaves a large hole in its floor unguarded. A customer, distracted by displays, falls in. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, the jury finds the customer 60% at fault and damages of $100,000. The customer recovers:
- Nothing, because the customer was more than 50% at fault
- $40,000, reduced by the customer's share of fault (Correct answer)
- $100,000, because the store created the hazard
- $60,000, the amount matching the customer's fault
Correct answer: $40,000, reduced by the customer's share of fault
In a pure comparative negligence system, a plaintiff recovers damages reduced by their percentage of fault regardless of how high that percentage is.
Question 7: A defendant breaks into a house at night intending to retrieve a bicycle he genuinely and reasonably believes is his own. At common law, is the defendant guilty of burglary?
- Yes, because he broke and entered a dwelling at night
- Yes, because mistake of fact never negates intent
- No, because he lacked the intent to commit a felony inside, believing the property was his (Correct answer)
- No, because taking a bicycle is only a misdemeanor
Correct answer: No, because he lacked the intent to commit a felony inside, believing the property was his
Burglary requires intent to commit a felony at entry, and an honest belief the property is one's own negates the intent to steal.
UT Bar Multistate Bar 3
A merchant emails another merchant offering to sell 500 widgets at $10 each, stating the offer will remain open for 10 days.
The offer is unsigned beyond the email signature block.
Under the UCC, the offer is: