A tavern sold liquor to a drunken patron who was subsequently involved as a driver in a fatal motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff was rendered a quadriplegic as a result. Prevailing precedent in this jurisdiction provides that the tavern does not owe a duty to third-party motorists to guard against injuries caused by patrons who become intoxicated at their place of business. If the plaintiff appeals the trial court's granting of the defendant tavern's motion to dismiss, could the state supreme court overrule the precedent and recognize the tavern's responsibility and liability for the plaintiff'sinjuries?

Select one:

a. Yes, but the new precedent can be applied only to subsequent cases.

b. Yes, if the precedent is no longer appropriate because of changing economic, political, and social conditions.

c. No, not unless the legislature changes the precedent by statute.

d. No, the doctrine ofstare decisisprevents precedents from being overruled without exception.

Betty, a citizen of California, hits Bob with her automobile in Texas. It is her fault and involves a question of state, not federal, law. Bob wants to bring a suit against Betty for $21,000 for personal injuries. Which court would have jurisdiction?

Select one:

a. Texas state court

b. California federal court

c. Texas federal court

d. All of the above

Which of the following is a TRUE statement?

Select one:

a. A plaintiff wishing to file suit in federal court, whose claim is based on rights provided her in a federal statute, must satisfy the jurisdictional amount requirement.

b. A citizen of the United States has a constitutional right to have any case tried in a federal court.

c. Where federal jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship, no plaintiff and defendant can be domiciled in the same state.

d. None of the above

Miranda v. Arizona(384 U.S. 436) held that the prosecution's use of statements of an accused, made to police without prior warnings of the person's rights to remain silent, to counsel, and to appointed counsel if indigent, was a violation of the accused's rights contained in

Select one:

a. The First Amendment

b. The Fourth Amendment

c. The Sixth Amendment

d. None of the above

Business A is angry about a fine received from Agency X. Business A believes that Agency X acted arbitrarily in levying the fine. Business A has absolutely no faith in Agency X and refuses to subject itself to its administrative review. Instead, Business A goes directly to the district court to appeal the fine. The district court will

Select one:

a. Take the case to determine whether Agency X acted arbitrarily

b. Refuse to take the case because Business A has not yet exhausted its administrative remedies

c. Defer to the agency as to whether it wants to have the first hearing of the case

d. None of the above

Authors, musicians, and computer software engineers are able to get an exclusive property right to their work.

Select one:

True

False

Al phoned Bea and offered to sell her "my farm in Vermont for $150,000." B says, "I accept." Al owns two farms in Vermont. He was referring to his 50-acre farm, whereas Bea was referring to his 100-acre farm. Regarding the agreement between Al and Bea

Select one:

a. There has been fraud.

b. There has been innocent misrepresentation.

c. A valid contract has not been formed.

d. An illegal contract has been formed.

An individual can be found liable for an intentional tort even if they had no intent to cause harm.

Select one:

True

False

In voluntary alternative dispute resolution (ADR), evidence that would be inadmissible in litigation is usually deemed admissible in ADR proceedings.

Select one:

True

False