I85PREP
⌘ K
Idaho Bar study materials
Idaho Bar study resources

Idaho Bar practice questions

One question at a time. Build your Idaho Bar understanding.

First 50 of 200 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

Under the NextGen bar exam's coverage of civil procedure, which doctrine permits a federal court sitting in diversity to apply the forum state's substantive law while still following the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on matters of procedure?

  1. The political question doctrine of Baker v. Carr
  2. The Erie doctrine, as refined by Hanna v. Plumer Correct answer.
  3. The abstention doctrine of Younger v. Harris
  4. The full faith and credit obligation of Article IV

Explanation

Erie Railroad v. Tompkins requires federal courts in diversity to apply state substantive law, and Hanna v. Plumer clarified that valid Federal Rules govern procedural matters even when they differ from state practice. The distinction turns on whether the federal rule is a genuine procedural regulation authorized by the Rules Enabling Act.

Question 2NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff files suit in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. During discovery, the plaintiff seeks documents that are protected by the attorney-client privilege under state law but would be discoverable under federal common law. Which privilege standard should the federal court apply?

  1. The law of the state where the plaintiff resides, regardless of the forum
  2. The court may choose whichever standard produces the fairer result
  3. Federal common law, because discovery is governed exclusively by the Federal Rules
  4. State privilege law, because state law supplies the rule of decision on the claim Correct answer.

Explanation

Federal Rule of Evidence 501 directs that in a civil case, state law governs privilege regarding a claim or defense for which state law supplies the rule of decision. In a diversity case, the state's privilege law therefore controls even though the Federal Rules govern discovery procedure generally.

Question 3NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant who has been properly served with process fails to respond within the required time. The plaintiff later seeks a default judgment. Which constitutional requirement most directly limits a court's ability to enter a binding judgment against that defendant?

  1. The requirement that the plaintiff have Article III standing
  2. The Case or Controversy limitation on advisory opinions
  3. The Due Process Clause's notice and opportunity-to-be-heard guarantee Correct answer.
  4. The Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial in civil cases

Explanation

Personal jurisdiction and the validity of default judgments rest on the Due Process Clause, which requires notice reasonably calculated to apprise the defendant and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. A judgment entered without adequate notice or an opportunity to respond is vulnerable to collateral attack.

Question 4NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A corporation is incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Texas. A plaintiff sues the corporation in federal court, asserting only state-law claims. For diversity purposes, where is the corporation a citizen?

  1. In both Delaware and Texas Correct answer.
  2. Only in Delaware, the state of incorporation
  3. Only in Texas, the principal place of business
  4. In every state where it conducts substantial business

Explanation

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), a corporation is a citizen of both its state of incorporation and the state where it has its principal place of business. The corporation is therefore a citizen of Delaware and Texas, and complete diversity requires the opposing party to be a citizen of neither.

Question 5NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A federal court is considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Under the pleading standard announced in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, a complaint survives when it contains what?

  1. A detailed recitation of every element with supporting evidence attached
  2. A short plain statement plus enough factual allegations to make the claim plausible Correct answer.
  3. Any conceivable set of facts that could support the claim
  4. A verified affidavit from the plaintiff asserting the claim is true

Explanation

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires a short and plain statement of the claim, and Twombly and Iqbal add that the factual allegations must state a plausible claim for relief. Labels, conclusions, and the mere possibility of misconduct are insufficient.

Question 6NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff sues in federal court on a federal question and also joins a state-law claim arising from the same transaction. The state-law claim shares a common nucleus of operative fact with the federal claim. What is the court's authority over the state-law claim?

  1. Diversity jurisdiction, if the parties are diverse and the amount exceeds $75,000
  2. Supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, subject to the statute's exceptions Correct answer.
  3. No jurisdiction, because federal courts cannot hear state-law claims
  4. Exclusive federal question jurisdiction over all related claims

Explanation

Section 1367 codifies supplemental jurisdiction, allowing a federal court to hear state claims that form part of the same case or controversy under Article III. The court may decline jurisdiction in specified circumstances, such as when the state claim raises novel or complex issues of state law.

Question 7NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant wishes to challenge a federal court's exercise of personal jurisdiction over her. She believes the defect is apparent from the face of the complaint and the record. What is the proper procedural vehicle for raising this objection?

  1. A motion for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e)
  2. A motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction Correct answer.
  3. A motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c)
  4. A motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction

Explanation

Rule 12(b)(2) is the specific vehicle for asserting lack of personal jurisdiction, and it must be raised in the first responsive pleading or pre-answer motion or the defense is waived. Subject matter jurisdiction, by contrast, can be raised at any time.

Question 8NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff asserts a claim for battery against a defendant. To establish a prima facie case, which element must the plaintiff prove in addition to an intentional act causing harmful or offensive contact?

  1. That the plaintiff suffered actual physical injury
  2. That the defendant intended to cause economic loss
  3. That the defendant acted with malice toward the plaintiff
  4. That the contact was harmful or offensive to a reasonable sense of personal dignity Correct answer.

Explanation

Battery requires an intentional act that causes harmful or offensive contact with the plaintiff's person. The contact is offensive if it would offend a reasonable sense of personal dignity; actual physical harm is not required.

Question 9NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A landowner posts a sign prohibiting hunting on her property. A hunter who sees the sign enters the land anyway and shoots a deer. In a trespass action, which statement best describes the landowner's recovery?

  1. She may recover only punitive damages, since nominal damages are unavailable
  2. She may recover nominal damages even without showing actual harm Correct answer.
  3. She may not recover because the hunter did not damage the property
  4. She may recover only if she proves actual physical damage to the land

Explanation

Trespass to land is actionable per se, so a landowner may recover nominal damages even absent proof of actual harm. The landowner may also recover actual damages caused by the trespass, and in appropriate cases punitive damages.

Question 10NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A homeowner keeps a large, aggressive dog in a fenced yard. A delivery driver who is lawfully on the premises to deliver a package is bitten when the dog escapes through an unlatched gate. Under the common law, which standard governs the homeowner's liability?

  1. Strict liability, because dogs are wild animals
  2. No liability, because the driver assumed the risk of entering the yard
  3. Negligence, because the owner knew or should have known of the dog's dangerous propensities Correct answer.
  4. Strict liability only if the dog had previously bitten someone

Explanation

Dogs are domestic animals, so the common law generally imposes negligence liability rather than strict liability, though many jurisdictions apply a strict-liability rule for known dangerous propensities. Liability turns on whether the owner knew or should have known of the animal's dangerous tendencies.

Question 11NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with larceny of a bicycle. Which fact is most essential to establishing the crime at common law?

  1. The defendant returned the bicycle the next day
  2. The defendant used force to take the bicycle from the owner
  3. The defendant trespassorily took and carried away the personal property of another with intent to permanently deprive Correct answer.
  4. The defendant took the bicycle openly in the presence of the owner

Explanation

Common-law larceny requires a trespassory taking and carrying away of another's personal property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner. Force is not required, and return of the property after the taking does not negate the completed crime.

Question 12NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with murder. At trial, the prosecution seeks to introduce evidence that the defendant fled the jurisdiction after the crime. The defense objects, arguing the flight evidence is irrelevant. How should the court rule?

  1. Admit the evidence only if the prosecution proves the defendant was guilty
  2. Exclude the evidence, because flight is not an element of murder
  3. Exclude the evidence unless the defendant takes the stand
  4. Admit the evidence as relevant circumstantial proof of consciousness of guilt Correct answer.

Explanation

Evidence of flight is relevant circumstantial evidence suggesting consciousness of guilt and is generally admissible, subject to the trial court's balancing under Rule 403. Relevance does not require that the evidence be an element of the charged offense.

Question 13NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A witness testifies at trial about a statement the defendant made to her before the crime. The defense objects on hearsay grounds. The prosecution responds that the statement is offered to show the defendant's state of mind rather than the truth of the matter asserted. How should the court rule?

  1. Admit the statement, because it is not hearsay when offered for a non-truth purpose Correct answer.
  2. Exclude the statement, because the defendant is a party-opponent
  3. Admit the statement only if the declarant testifies at trial
  4. Exclude the statement, because all out-of-court statements are hearsay

Explanation

Federal Rule of Evidence 801 defines hearsay as an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. When the statement is offered to show the declarant's state of mind, it is not hearsay and is admissible if relevant.

Question 14NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff offers a certified copy of a public record to prove a fact stated in the record. The defendant objects on hearsay grounds. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, what is the correct analysis?

  1. The record is admissible under the public records exception if it sets out matters observed or factual findings, subject to the Rule 803(8) limits Correct answer.
  2. The record is admissible only if the author testifies
  3. The record is admissible only in criminal cases
  4. Public records are categorically inadmissible hearsay

Explanation

Rule 803(8) creates a hearsay exception for public records that set out the office's activities, matters observed under a legal duty to report, or factual findings from authorized investigations. The exception is subject to limits, including exclusion of police reports in criminal cases when offered by the prosecution.

Question 15NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with a federal offense. At trial, the prosecution offers evidence that the defendant previously committed a similar crime. The defense objects. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), which statement best describes the rule's operation?

  1. Prior crimes are always admissible to show propensity
  2. Prior crimes are admissible only if the defendant was convicted
  3. Prior crimes are never admissible in criminal cases
  4. Prior crimes are inadmissible for propensity but may be admissible for purposes such as motive, intent, or identity Correct answer.

Explanation

Rule 404(b) prohibits using prior bad acts to prove propensity but permits them for other purposes, such as motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake. The trial court must also find the evidence relevant and satisfy Rule 403.

Question 16NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant in a criminal case makes an incriminating statement to a police officer before being advised of his rights. The prosecution seeks to introduce the statement. Which constitutional doctrine governs the admissibility of the statement?

  1. The Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule
  2. The Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial
  3. The Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment
  4. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, as interpreted in Miranda v. Arizona Correct answer.

Explanation

Miranda v. Arizona requires that custodial interrogation be preceded by warnings about the right to remain silent and the right to counsel, and statements obtained without those warnings are generally inadmissible. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is the constitutional source of the rule.

Question 17NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A state enacts a law that burdens interstate commerce by imposing a tax on goods imported from other states while exempting identical goods produced in-state. A producer challenges the law. Which constitutional provision is most directly implicated?

  1. The Contracts Clause
  2. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment
  3. The Commerce Clause, as interpreted by the dormant Commerce Clause doctrine Correct answer.
  4. The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV

Explanation

The dormant Commerce Clause prohibits state laws that discriminate against or unduly burden interstate commerce. A tax that discriminates against out-of-state goods while exempting in-state goods is a classic violation of that doctrine.

Question 18NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A state enacts a law that requires all residents to obtain a license before engaging in a lawful occupation. A resident challenges the law as a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Which standard of review applies?

  1. Strict scrutiny, because the right to pursue a livelihood is fundamental
  2. No review, because states have plenary police power
  3. Rational basis review, because economic regulation is presumptively valid Correct answer.
  4. Intermediate scrutiny, because the law affects a sensitive class

Explanation

Economic and occupational regulations are reviewed under the rational basis standard, which upholds a law if it is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. The right to pursue a calling is not treated as a fundamental right for equal protection purposes.

Question 19NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff brings a products liability claim against a manufacturer, alleging a design defect. Under the risk-utility test, what must the plaintiff typically show?

  1. That the manufacturer failed to warn of an obvious danger
  2. That the manufacturer intended the product to cause harm
  3. That the product was unreasonably dangerous only to the particular plaintiff
  4. That a reasonable alternative design would have reduced the risk without unreasonable cost Correct answer.

Explanation

Under the risk-utility approach, a design defect is established when the foreseeable risks could have been reduced or avoided by a reasonable alternative design, and the omission renders the product not reasonably safe. The test balances the utility of the design against the magnitude of the risk.

Question 20NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A seller and buyer enter into a contract for the sale of goods. The seller later discovers that the market price has risen sharply and refuses to deliver. The buyer sues for breach. Which remedy is most likely available to the buyer under the UCC?

  1. Specific performance in every case of breach
  2. Punitive damages to deter future breaches
  3. The difference between the market price and the contract price, plus incidental and consequential damages Correct answer.
  4. Rescission and restitution only

Explanation

Under UCC § 2-713, a buyer may recover the difference between the market price at the time of tender and the contract price, together with incidental and consequential damages. Specific performance is available only when the goods are unique or otherwise appropriate.

Question 21NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A party seeks to enforce a contract that is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. Which doctrine may allow enforcement despite the absence of a signed writing?

  1. Promissory estoppel, in appropriate circumstances Correct answer.
  2. The rule against perpetuities
  3. The parol evidence rule
  4. The doctrine of merger

Explanation

Promissory estoppel can remove a contract from the Statute of Frauds when the party seeking enforcement reasonably and foreseeably relied on the promise to their detriment. Courts apply the doctrine narrowly to avoid swallowing the writing requirement.

Question 22NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A testator executes a will leaving her estate to her two children. She later marries, and her new spouse survives her. Under the Uniform Probate Code's omitted-spouse provision, what is the surviving spouse generally entitled to receive?

  1. Only the family allowance, not an intestate share
  2. Nothing, because the will was validly executed before the marriage
  3. The entire estate, to the exclusion of the children
  4. An intestate share of the estate, subject to the statute's limitations Correct answer.

Explanation

Under UPC § 2-301, a spouse who marries the testator after the will is executed and who is omitted from the will generally receives an intestate share of the estate. The provision protects surviving spouses from unintentional disinheritance.

Question 23NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A grantor conveys property 'to A for life, then to A's heirs.' Under the traditional common-law rule, what interest do A's heirs hold?

  1. Nothing, because the grant violates the rule against perpetuities
  2. A vested remainder in fee simple
  3. A reversion in the grantor
  4. A contingent remainder, because the heirs are unascertainable Correct answer.

Explanation

Under the doctrine of worthier title, a grant to A's heirs creates a contingent remainder in the heirs, but the grantor retains a reversion that becomes possessory if the heirs are not determined. Because the heirs are unascertainable until A dies, their remainder is contingent.

Question 24NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with burglary. The prosecution must prove the defendant broke and entered a dwelling at night with the intent to commit a felony therein. The defendant entered a store during daytime hours. Which element is most clearly absent?

  1. Breaking
  2. Entry
  3. The dwelling-house requirement and nighttime requirement Correct answer.
  4. Intent to commit a felony

Explanation

Common-law burglary requires breaking and entering a dwelling at nighttime with intent to commit a felony. A store is not a dwelling, and daytime entry fails the nighttime element, so the dwelling and nighttime requirements are absent.

Question 25NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with a crime and seeks to suppress evidence obtained during a warrantless search of his home. The prosecution argues the search was justified by exigent circumstances. Which factor is most relevant to the exigency analysis?

  1. Whether the officers announced their presence before entering
  2. Whether the defendant had a prior criminal record
  3. Whether there was a reasonable belief that evidence would be destroyed or that someone was in danger Correct answer.
  4. Whether the defendant consented to the search after being arrested

Explanation

Exigent circumstances justify a warrantless entry when officers reasonably believe immediate action is necessary to prevent destruction of evidence, protect safety, or address a hot pursuit. The test is objective and focuses on the urgency of the situation at the time of entry.

Question 26NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

Under the NextGen UBE civil procedure framework, a federal district court sits in a state whose long-arm statute reaches the limits of the Due Process Clause. A plaintiff sues a nonresident defendant who has never visited the forum but who maintains an interactive website through which forum residents regularly purchase goods. Which standard governs whether the court may exercise specific personal jurisdiction over that defendant?

  1. Whether the plaintiff resides in the forum state and the claim exceeds the amount in controversy
  2. Whether the defendant's contacts with the forum exceed those with any other state, measured by total revenue
  3. Whether the defendant is registered to do business in the forum state at the time the complaint is filed
  4. Whether the defendant purposefully established minimum contacts with the forum and the assertion of jurisdiction comports with fair play and substantial justice Correct answer.

Explanation

Specific jurisdiction requires purposeful availment of the forum's benefits plus a reasonableness assessment under the fair play and substantial justice standard. A single interactive website is not automatically sufficient; the court examines the nature and quality of the contacts and their relation to the claim.

Question 27NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A federal court exercises diversity jurisdiction over a state-law negligence claim. Neither party has requested a jury, and the judge plans to decide disputed fact questions herself. Which constitutional provision controls whether the parties are entitled to a jury trial on the negligence claim?

  1. The Sixth Amendment, because it guarantees a jury trial in all civil actions brought in federal court
  2. The Seventh Amendment, because it preserves the right to jury trial in suits at common law where the amount in controversy exceeds twenty dollars Correct answer.
  3. Article III, because it requires federal courts to empanel juries in every diversity case
  4. The Due Process Clause, because it requires juries whenever state law would provide one

Explanation

The Seventh Amendment preserves the right to jury trial in suits at common law, and negligence actions are historically actions at law. Federal courts apply a federal standard to determine the right, so state practice does not control.

Question 28NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff sues a defendant in federal court for breach of a written contract. The plaintiff serves interrogatories asking the defendant to identify every person with knowledge of the negotiations. The defendant responds with a list of names but omits his own attorney, who sat in on the negotiations. Which principle governs whether the attorney's identity must be disclosed?

  1. The attorney-client privilege, because the attorney was present during confidential negotiations
  2. The spousal privilege, because the attorney may have relayed information to a spouse
  3. The work-product doctrine, because the attorney's observations were made in anticipation of litigation
  4. The discovery rules' relevance standard, because identity information is generally discoverable unless privileged Correct answer.

Explanation

Under the federal discovery rules, a party may obtain discovery of any nonprivileged matter relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. The mere identity of a person with knowledge is typically discoverable, and no privilege protects the fact of the attorney's presence at negotiations.

Question 29NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with common-law arson. The prosecution proves that the defendant intentionally set fire to a vacant house he owned. Which additional element must the prosecution establish to sustain the charge?

  1. The structure burned was insured against fire loss
  2. The structure burned was the dwelling of another Correct answer.
  3. The fire spread beyond the structure the defendant intended to burn
  4. The defendant acted with intent to defraud an insurer

Explanation

Common-law arson requires the malicious burning of the dwelling house of another. A person cannot commit common-law arson against his own dwelling, so ownership by another is an essential element.

Question 30NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with receiving stolen property. The prosecution proves that the defendant bought a television at a price far below market value from a stranger in a parking lot. Which element of the offense is the prosecution seeking to establish through these facts?

  1. That the property had been transported across state lines
  2. That the defendant knew the property was stolen Correct answer.
  3. That the defendant intended to resell the property at a profit
  4. That the defendant himself stole the property

Explanation

Receiving stolen property requires that the defendant receive possession and control of stolen property knowing it to be stolen. Suspiciously low price and irregular circumstances are circumstantial evidence of that knowledge.

Question 31NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff sues a defendant for negligence after a car accident. The defendant claims the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. In a jurisdiction that has adopted comparative negligence, which consequence follows if the jury finds the plaintiff 30 percent at fault?

  1. The plaintiff recovers nothing because any contributory fault bars recovery
  2. The plaintiff recovers nothing unless the defendant's fault exceeds the plaintiff's by a ratio of three to one
  3. The plaintiff's damages are reduced by 30 percent, and the plaintiff may recover the remaining 70 percent Correct answer.
  4. The plaintiff recovers full damages because comparative negligence shifts all fault to the defendant

Explanation

Under comparative negligence, the plaintiff's recovery is reduced in proportion to the plaintiff's share of fault. A 30 percent allocation therefore reduces damages by 30 percent, and the plaintiff recovers the balance unless a modified form bars recovery for plaintiffs above a threshold.

Question 32NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A landowner grants a neighbor an easement by express written instrument that is properly recorded. The instrument states that the easement is 'for the benefit of the neighbor's parcel' but does not specify whether it runs with the land. The neighbor later sells the parcel. Which characteristic determines whether the easement passes to the buyer?

  1. Whether the easement was granted without consideration
  2. Whether the easement was granted for a term of years
  3. Whether the easement is appurtenant to the dominant estate Correct answer.
  4. Whether the easement was created before the neighbor acquired title

Explanation

An easement appurtenant attaches to the dominant estate and passes automatically with a conveyance of that estate. An easement in gross is personal to the holder and generally does not transfer unless it is commercial and assignable.

Question 33NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A testator with two adult children executes a valid will leaving everything to charity. The testator's spouse survives him and is omitted from the will. Under the elective share doctrine, what is the spouse's basic entitlement?

  1. A statutory share of the estate that the spouse may elect to take in place of the will's provision Correct answer.
  2. The entire estate, because a surviving spouse always takes to the exclusion of children
  3. Nothing, because the will was validly executed and the spouse was not disinherited by divorce
  4. A life estate in the family residence only, with the remainder to the children

Explanation

The elective share allows a surviving spouse to claim a statutory fraction of the decedent's estate rather than accept an inadequate or omitted provision. It operates as a protection against disinheritance and is elected within statutory limits.

Question 34NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with felony murder based on a robbery during which an accomplice shot and killed a victim. The defendant was the getaway driver and never entered the store. Which doctrine is most relevant to whether the defendant may be convicted of felony murder?

  1. The doctrine of transferred intent, which applies only to battery
  2. The merger doctrine, which bars felony murder predicated on assault
  3. The agency theory of felony murder, which limits liability to killings committed by the defendant or an accomplice acting in furtherance of the felony Correct answer.
  4. The year-and-a-day rule, which bars prosecution for deaths occurring after that period

Explanation

Jurisdictions divide on felony murder liability for killings by nonparticipants. The agency theory limits liability to killings committed by a felon or accomplice in furtherance of the felony, while the proximate cause theory can reach some third-party killings.

Question 35NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with embezzlement. The prosecution proves that the defendant, a bank teller, took cash from the teller drawer and spent it. Which fact is most essential to distinguish embezzlement from larceny in this case?

  1. The defendant used force to obtain the cash
  2. The defendant intended to repay the cash later
  3. The defendant took the cash at night
  4. The defendant had lawful possession of the cash before converting it Correct answer.

Explanation

Embezzlement requires conversion of property by one who has lawful possession of it, whereas larceny involves a trespassory taking from another's possession. A teller who lawfully possesses the drawer cash and then converts it commits embezzlement.

Question 36NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff asserts a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress against a defendant who repeatedly sent harassing messages after being asked to stop. Which element most often determines whether the claim survives a motion to dismiss?

  1. Whether the parties had a prior contractual relationship
  2. Whether the defendant intended to make a profit
  3. Whether the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous Correct answer.
  4. Whether the plaintiff suffered a physical impact

Explanation

Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires extreme and outrageous conduct, intent or recklessness, causation, and severe emotional distress. The outrageousness element is the most frequent battleground because courts set a high threshold for conduct that exceeds all bounds of decency.

Question 37NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A state enacts a law prohibiting the sale of any product that is manufactured in a facility that does not meet the state's stricter emissions standards, even if the product was made in another state and complies with federal standards. A manufacturer challenges the law under the dormant Commerce Clause. Which principle is central to the analysis?

  1. Whether the law discriminates against interstate commerce or imposes burdens that clearly exceed its local benefits Correct answer.
  2. Whether the state law was enacted by a majority vote of the legislature
  3. Whether the manufacturer sells products in interstate commerce at all
  4. Whether the federal government has enacted any statute regulating emissions

Explanation

Dormant Commerce Clause analysis asks first whether a law discriminates against interstate commerce, which triggers strict scrutiny, and if nondiscriminatory, whether the burdens on interstate commerce clearly exceed the local benefits under Pike.

Question 38NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A federal statute gives the Environmental Protection Agency authority to set standards for pollutants. A state enacts a rule that is more stringent than the federal standard in an area the statute expressly leaves to state regulation. Which doctrine determines whether the state rule survives a preemption challenge?

  1. The political question doctrine, which bars courts from reviewing environmental rules
  2. The spending power, which allows Congress to condition federal funds on state compliance
  3. Preemption analysis, which asks whether Congress intended to occupy the field or whether the state law conflicts with federal law Correct answer.
  4. The abstention doctrine, which requires federal courts to defer to state courts in all environmental cases

Explanation

Preemption turns on congressional intent, expressed through express preemption, field preemption, or conflict preemption. A savings clause preserving state regulation supports upholding stricter state standards.

Question 39NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A criminal defendant moves to suppress a confession obtained after police told him that his statements would be used only to help him, not against him. Which constitutional guarantee is most directly implicated by this deception?

  1. The Fourth Amendment, because the confession followed an unlawful search
  2. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel, because the police spoke with him before formal charges
  3. The Due Process Clause, because the deception may render the confession involuntary Correct answer.
  4. The Eighth Amendment, because the confession was obtained while he was in custody

Explanation

Coercive police tactics, including trickery that undermines the reliability of a confession, can render it involuntary under the Due Process Clause. Courts assess the totality of the circumstances to determine whether the will was overborne.

Question 40NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

At trial, the prosecution offers a witness's out-of-court statement identifying the defendant as the robber. The witness is unavailable because he invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege. The statement was made during a police interview with no opportunity for cross-examination. Which hearsay exception or exclusion is the prosecution most likely to invoke?

  1. Present sense impression, because the witness described an event as it happened
  2. Excited utterance, because the interview occurred shortly after the crime
  3. Former testimony, because the witness spoke under oath
  4. Statement against interest, because the witness admitted knowing the defendant Correct answer.

Explanation

A statement against interest requires that the declarant be unavailable and that the statement be so contrary to the declarant's interest that a reasonable person would not have made it unless true. Courts must also consider whether admitting it would violate the Confrontation Clause.

Question 41NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A party offers a business record to prove that a delivery occurred on a certain date. The record was created by an employee whose job was to log deliveries, and the employee is unavailable. Which foundation is required for the record to be admissible?

  1. That the record was created specifically for this litigation
  2. That the employee personally testifies to the record's accuracy
  3. That the record was made at or near the time of the event by someone with knowledge, kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity, and made as a regular practice Correct answer.
  4. That the record was certified by a notary public

Explanation

The business records exception requires the record to be made at or near the time by a person with knowledge, kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and created as part of a regular practice. The custodian or another qualified witness may lay the foundation.

Question 42NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with larceny. The prosecution proves that the defendant took a laptop from a coworker's desk intending to keep it permanently. Which additional fact, if true, would most strengthen the prosecution's case that the taking was trespassory?

  1. The defendant believed the laptop was abandoned
  2. The defendant used the laptop for personal business
  3. The defendant returned the laptop the next day
  4. The defendant took the laptop without the coworker's consent Correct answer.

Explanation

Larceny requires a trespassory taking and carrying away of another's personal property with intent to permanently deprive. A taking without consent is the core of the trespassory element.

Question 43NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff files suit in federal court alleging a violation of a federal statute and joins a state-law claim arising from the same facts. The state claim does not independently satisfy the amount in controversy. Which doctrine allows the federal court to hear the state claim?

  1. Removal jurisdiction, because the defendant may remove the state claim
  2. Diversity jurisdiction, because the parties are citizens of different states
  3. Pendent party jurisdiction, because the state claim involves an additional party
  4. Supplemental jurisdiction, because the state claim shares a common nucleus of operative fact with the federal claim Correct answer.

Explanation

Supplemental jurisdiction permits a federal court to hear state claims that form part of the same case or controversy as a claim within its original jurisdiction. The state claim here arises from the same facts as the federal claim.

Question 44NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with burglary of a dwelling. The prosecution proves that the defendant entered a garage attached to the house through an unlocked door at 10 p.m. and stole tools. Which element is most likely to be disputed at trial?

  1. Whether the defendant intended to commit a felony inside
  2. Whether the defendant acted at night
  3. Whether the attached garage constitutes a dwelling within the meaning of burglary Correct answer.
  4. Whether the tools were personal property

Explanation

Common-law burglary requires breaking and entering the dwelling of another at night with intent to commit a felony therein. Whether an attached garage qualifies as part of the dwelling is a contested legal question, while the other facts are established or irrelevant to the disputed element.

Question 45NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff sues a manufacturer for injuries caused by a machine. The plaintiff alleges that the machine lacked a guard that would have prevented the injury and that the guard was feasible and inexpensive. Which theory of liability is the plaintiff asserting?

  1. Design defect, measured by whether a reasonable alternative design would have reduced the risk Correct answer.
  2. Manufacturing defect, measured by whether the product deviated from its intended specifications
  3. Failure to warn, measured by whether the warnings were adequate
  4. Breach of express warranty, measured by whether the product matched the seller's description

Explanation

A design defect claim asserts that the product's design itself was unreasonably dangerous and that a reasonable alternative design could have reduced the risk. The availability of a feasible, cost-effective guard supports that theory.

Question 46NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A buyer and seller enter into a contract for the sale of goods. The buyer later discovers that the seller made a fraudulent misrepresentation about the goods. Which remedy is available to the buyer?

  1. Specific performance of the contract as written
  2. Consequential damages only, with no right to cancel
  3. Rescission of the contract and restitution of any payments made Correct answer.
  4. Reformation of the contract to reflect the buyer's understanding

Explanation

Fraudulent misrepresentation renders a contract voidable by the defrauded party, who may rescind and seek restitution of benefits conferred. The buyer may also seek damages in some circumstances, but rescission and restitution are classic remedies.

Question 47NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

An employer and employee enter into an employment contract that includes a covenant not to compete for two years within a 500-mile radius. The employee later leaves and takes a job within the radius. Which factor is most important in determining whether the covenant is enforceable?

  1. Whether the employer paid the employee a salary above the market rate
  2. Whether the covenant was notarized
  3. Whether the covenant is reasonable in time and geographic scope and necessary to protect a legitimate interest Correct answer.
  4. Whether the employee signed the covenant on the first day of work

Explanation

Restrictive covenants are enforceable only if reasonable in duration and scope and necessary to protect a legitimate business interest such as trade secrets or customer relationships. Courts balance the employer's interest against the employee's ability to earn a living.

Question 48NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A defendant is charged with a federal offense and moves to suppress evidence seized during a warrantless search of his vehicle. The police stopped the vehicle because its taillight was out, then searched the trunk without consent or probable cause. Which doctrine is the prosecution most likely to rely on to justify the search?

  1. The consent exception, which applies because the driver was asked to step out
  2. The inventory search exception, which applies whenever a vehicle is towed
  3. The plain view exception, which applies because the trunk was closed
  4. The automobile exception, which permits a warrantless search of a vehicle when there is probable cause to believe it contains contraband Correct answer.

Explanation

The automobile exception allows a warrantless search of a vehicle if police have probable cause to believe it contains evidence of a crime. A traffic stop alone does not supply probable cause to search the trunk.

Question 49NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A state enacts a law that requires all public-school students to recite a pledge, but allows objecting students to be excused. A student challenges the law under the First Amendment. Which standard of review applies?

  1. Rational basis review, because the law concerns education
  2. Strict scrutiny, because the law compels speech
  3. Intermediate scrutiny, because the law regulates expressive conduct in a public forum Correct answer.
  4. The Establishment Clause test, because the pledge mentions no religion

Explanation

A law regulating expressive conduct in a public forum, such as a school, is generally reviewed under intermediate scrutiny, which requires an important interest and a close fit. An opt-out provision may reduce the burden on objectors, but the standard remains intermediate for content-neutral conduct regulations.

Question 50NextGen UBE subject matter (as published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners)

A plaintiff and defendant reach a settlement agreement during a court-ordered mediation. The agreement is read into the record but not signed by the parties. The defendant later refuses to pay. Which principle determines whether the court may enforce the settlement?

  1. Whether the mediator approved the terms
  2. Whether the settlement was filed under seal
  3. Whether the parties intended to be bound and the agreement satisfies the statute of frauds if applicable Correct answer.
  4. Whether the defendant had independent counsel

Explanation

A settlement agreement is enforceable like any contract if the parties intended to be bound and the essential terms are sufficiently definite. If the agreement falls within the statute of frauds, a writing or a recorded oral agreement may be required.