Mbe Supplemental Questions

Front 1

Con. Law: State tax over federal land interferes:

Back 1

with the plenary powers of Congress to regulate federal lands. Art. 4 sec. 3 gives Congress the power to enact all rules and regulations regarding federal lands.

Front 2

Con. Law: Under what power could Congress enact a federal uniform child custody law?

Back 2

The taxing and spending powers clause.

Neither the commerce clause or the privileges and immunities clause have been recognized in the area of child custody.

Front 3

Con Law: Can the state require an oath for public employees that they will not join an organization that is involved with criminal acts?

Back 3

No. To be constitutional, the restriction must be specific, and only apply to knowing membership with the specific intent to further unlawful aims.

Front 4

Con. Law: Can the state require an loyalty oath stating a pledge not to overthrow the government?

Back 4

Yes. An oath has been upheld as constitutional requiring state employees to pledge not to allow the government to be overthrown by violence, force, illegal or unconstitutional activity.

Front 5

Con. Law: What is the standard for protection under the Free Exercise clause?

Back 5

Whether the religious belief is sincerely held.

Front 6

Con. Law: May a state charge an indigent person a fee to run for public office?

Back 6

No. The state must waive the fee. However, the state can insist on a financial statement from all candidates, including indigents.

Front 7

Con. Law: Does the post office clause allow the post office to operate as a monopoly on letter delivery?

Back 7

Yes. No other system for delivering mail, public or private, may be operated without Congress' consent.

Front 8

Con. Law: What is a bill of attainder?

Back 8

A legislative act that inflicts punishment without a trial on individuals who are designated by name or in terms of past conduct. E.g. membership in the communist party.

Front 9

Contracts: A minor in breach of a contract may avoid liability

Back 9

by disaffirming the contract, and if K for goods, by also returning the goods.

Front 10

Contracts: A contract with a minor is not void for lack of capacity

Back 10

when it is for necessities.

Tip: look for unconscionability.

Front 11

Contracts: Where there is a oral condition precedent

Back 11

the contract falls outside the parol evidence rule.

Front 12

Contracts: Parties may stipulate liquidated damages if:

Back 12

1. damages are difficult to ascertain at the time the contract is formed; and

2. the amount is a reasonable forecast to compensatory damages in the case of breach.

Front 13

Contracts: A modification of price for goods over $500

Back 13

is valid without consideration if in good faith, and in writing to comply with the Statute of Frauds.

Front 14

Torts: Strict liability is not imposed against landowners

Back 14

for trespassers.

Front 15

Crim. Law: Refusal to cooperate with an investigation can be considered for punishment because:

Back 15

the right against self-incrimination does not afford a privilege to refuse to incriminate others.

Front 16

Crim. Law: When two defendants are tried together, the statement of a co-defendant implicating a nontestifying co-defendant is inadmissible unless:

Back 16

1. all references to the nontestifying co-defendant are redacted;

2. co-defendant who made statement will take stand and subject himself to cross-examination over the statement; or

3. the statement is being admitted to rebut a claim by nontestifying co-defendant that his statement was coerced, and the judge gives a limiting instruction that the statement is to be considered as to the purpose of the admission.

Front 17

Crim. Law: The right to post-arrest silence under Miranda is not waived:

Back 17

by the defendant voluntarily taking the stand, thereby waiving his right against self-incrimination.

Front 18

Crim. Law: Can a person be convicted of attempted murder under a theory of felony murder?

Back 18

Probably not. Because an attempt requires specific intent to commit the crime, the intent to commit a felony is not enough to prove the specific intent required for the intent.

Front 19

Crim. Law: Is insanity of a co-conspirator a defense to conspiracy?

Back 19

Yes, if the insanity prevents an agreement between two "guilty minds". E.g. a conspiracy of two people, one of which is insane.

Front 20

Property: Damages to improvements due to subsidence after excavation of adjoining property is recoverable if:

Back 20

1. Would have occurred from excavation to property in natural state, without improvement.
2. the excavation was done negligently

Front 21

Property: For notice statutes, for a prior deed to defeat a subsequent BFP,

Back 21

there must be notice AT THE TIME of the purchase. Later recording does not matter.

Front 22

Evidence: What is the difference between the burden of persuasion and the burden of going forward with the evidence?

Back 22

Burden of persuasion is always with the plaintiff.

Burden of going forward with the evidence is on the plaintiff to establish a prima facie case. Once established, it shifts back to the defendant until the defendant creates a presumption on an element of the prima facie case. Then burden shifts back to plaintiff to rebut presumption.

Front 23

Evidence: Are statements to physicians in preparation of litigation protected by privilege?

Back 23

Yes, under the attorney-client privilege, not the patient-physician privelege.