Essay Questions and Selected Answers July 2004

More documents

Recommendations

Info

. .WHAT CLAIMS, IF ANY, MAY JACK ASSERT AGAINST LAWYER, AND WHATDAMAGES, IF ANY, MAY HE RECOVER?Jack v. LawyerJack will sue Lawyer for malpractice.Duty - Lawyer had a duty to act in a competent manner and as a reasonable attorneyunder the circumstances. There was a client-lawyer relationship between Jack andLawyer, and so the duty was owed to Jack.Breach - Lawyer breached this duty by not filing the lawsuit until the statute had run. Thiswas something that a competent attorney would not have done.Causation - actual - but for Lawyer failing to file the suit, the statute would not have runand Jack would still have a cause of action against Chip.Causation - proximate - it was foreseeable that failing to file the suit would result in thesuit being barred by the statute.Damages - Jack will claim that he should recover from Lawyer the same thing he wouldhave recovered had Lawyer not been incompetent and failed to file the suit. This meanswe must look to Wilbur’s liability to Jack, because the mere fact that Lawyer wasincompetent does not mean that Jack is immediately entitled to a recovery; the lawyer isnot the insurer of the validity of the client’s claim such that a client can get an automaticrecovery from the lawyer if the lawyer breaches some duty of care in regards to the clientwhere the claim was one which had a low chance of success.Hypothetical lawsuit - Jack v. WilburNegligence - supra.Duty - Jack will have a very difficult time proving that Wilbur owed him a duty. Wilbur wasdriving down the street and ran a red light. It is difficult to argue that Wilbur owes a dutyto Jack, who was probably in his house across the street and was not physically harmedby Wilbur’s actions. Jack was probably well outside the zone of danger which resultedfrom driving a car down the street.Jack can probably not show that he was owed a duty by Wilbur. If he can, then he willattempt to show breach, causation, and damages.Breach - If Jack can show a duty owed by Wilbur, then driving through the light probablybreached this duty.54
Causation - but for Wilbur driving through the light, Chip would not have been injured.Causation - proximate - it was probably not foreseeable that driving through the light andhitting someone would cause damages to Jack, who was not at the scene; furthermore,these are only economic damages without physical damages[,] which are not the kind ofharm anticipated by the breach of duty.Damages - Jack would have had the same problem showing that the job would have beencompleted as Melinda: the chance of the job actually being finished is so low and difficultto prove that a court would almost certainly not allow a recovery in this case.The question will be whether or not Chip would have successfully completed cutting theStar had he not been struck by Wilbur’s car. If it appears that he would have completed,then it is possible that this $100,000 could be recovered. However, there is a very strongargument that Chip would not have completed the task. 19 of 20 master diamond cuttersin the world declined the job because they thought that they could never do it withoutshattering the Star. This means that in the professional judgment of men and women whoare masters in their field, 95% of them (19/20) turned the job down as impossible. Sincethe burden of proof in a civil action is a preponderance of the evidence (51%), it is almostcertain that the burden of proof cannot be met here to show that the $100,000 would havebeen recovered had Wilbur not knocked down Chip.Furthermore, Jack only has economic damages under a contract to which Wilbur was nota party.Contract - because Wilbur was not a party to the contract and did not intentionally interferewith the contractual relations of Wilbur and Jack, it is unlikely that Wilbur can be sued forinterference with this contract.Jack will probably not recover from Lawyer, due to the fact that Chip actually cutting theStar properly was extremely unlikely to occur.55
Page 1 and 2:
CaliforniaBarExaminationEssay Quest
Page 3 and 4:
TUESDAY MORNINGJULY 27, 2004Califor
Page 5 and 6:
Answer A to Question 11)1. A. Dan -
Page 7 and 8: crime.Second Degree MurderDan is mu
Page 9 and 10: Here, Dan’s strongest argument is
Page 11 and 12: ecause the killing of Art took plac
Page 13 and 14: Here, there is no evidence that Chu
Page 15 and 16: Question 2State X amended its anti-
Page 17 and 18: invites abuse of indigent or undesi
Page 19 and 20: Answer B to Question 22)Validity of
Page 21 and 22: Alice’s CaseAlice’s StandingAli
Page 23 and 24: fulfill its duties in transporting
Page 25 and 26: Question 3Hank, an avid skier, live
Page 27 and 28: B. ANN’S CLAIM1. Omitted ChildAnn
Page 29 and 30: e returned to the settlor’s estat
Page 31 and 32: the will. If, however, the presumpt
Page 33 and 34: 2. Fred’s ClaimFred (F)’s claim
Page 35 and 36: ecause the “real” beneficiary i
Page 37 and 38: Question 4Victor had been dating Da
Page 39 and 40: Hearsay is a statement made by the
Page 41 and 42: is to satisfy the prosecution’s b
Page 43 and 44: Answer B to Question 41) The issue
Page 45 and 46: 2) V’s TestimonyRelevanceV’s st
Page 47 and 48: substantial effect an the outcome o
Page 49 and 50: Answer A to Question 55)Duty of loy
Page 51 and 52: interest. On the one hand, it seems
Page 53 and 54: 1. Duty of dignity to legal profess
Page 55 and 56: Question 6Jack owned the world’s
Page 57: actuary table. The fact that Chip w
Page 61 and 62: have been injured and then died.Pro
Page 63 and 64: succeeded on his claim against Wilb
show all

Essay Questions and Selected Answers July 2004

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?