MultiState Bar Examination (MBE) 3 – Sample

A man sued a railroad for personal injuries suffered when his car was struck by a train at an unguarded crossing. A major issue is whether the train sounded its whistle before arriving at the crossing. The railroad has offered the testimony of a resident who has lived near the crossing for 15 years. Although she was not present on the occasion in question, she will testify that, whenever she is home, the train always sounds its whistle before arriving at the crossing. Is the resident�s testimony admissible?

To keep its public school expenditures under control in a time of increasing costs, a state passed a law providing that children who have not lived in the state for at least one year cannot attend public schools in the state. Which of the following statements about this law is most accurate as a matter of constitutional law?

A man has four German shepherd dogs that he has trained for guard duty and that he holds for breeding purposes. The man has �Beware of Dogs� signs clearly posted around a fenced-in yard where he keeps the dogs. The man�s next-door neighbor frequently walks past the man�s house and knows about the dogs� ferocity. One summer day, the neighbor entered the man�s fenced-in yard to retrieve a snow shovel that the man had borrowed during the past winter. The neighbor was attacked by one of the dogs and was severely injured. In a suit against the man, is the neighbor likely to prevail?

A woman from State A filed an action against a retailer in a state court in State B. The complaint alleged that the retailer had not delivered $100,000 worth of goods for which the woman had paid. Twenty days after being served, the retailer, which is incor-porated in State C and has its principal place of business in State B, filed a notice of removal in a federal district court in State B. Was the action properly removed?

A man owned a house where he lived with his family. The man was convicted of selling large quantities of an illegal drug from his house. Acting under a state law authorizing the destruction of buildings that are used for illegal activity, the city destroyed the man�s house. The man�s family then rented an apartment and demanded that the city pay the rent for that temporary residence. The family relied on a state law providing that any person who was dispossessed of his or her place of residence because of the actions of city officials was entitled to replacement housing at the city�s expense until permanent substitute housing could be found. When the city refused to pay the rent for the apartment, the man�s family sued the city in a state trial court claiming a right to such payment under both the state law and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The highest state court ruled for the family. Although the court decided that the family had no right to payment under the state law, it held that the Fourteenth Amendment entitled the family to payment of the rent for the temporary apart-ment. In its opinion, the highest state court indicated that in several of its decisions it had found cities liable for compen-sation in similar situations on the basis of the due process clause of the state constitution. But the highest state court declined to base its holding on the state constitution because that issue had not been properly raised in the case. The city then filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court. Does the Court have jurisdiction to review the merits of this case?

A sporting goods shop contracted with a publisher to buy, for sale in its store, 1,200 posters featuring a professional golfer. During production, the image of the golfer was inad-vertently reversed and the right-handed golfer appeared to be left-handed. When the posters were delivered on the date provided in the contract, the sporting goods shop noticed the discrepancy, which had no provable significant impact on the effectiveness of the poster. In the opinion of the shop man-agement, however, the posters did not look as good as they had in the catalog from which the shop had ordered them.

A woman borrowed $800,000 from a bank and gave the bank a note for that amount secured by a mortgage on her farm. Several years later, at a time when the woman still owed the bank $750,000 on the mortgage loan, she sold the farm to a man for $900,000. The man paid the woman $150,000 in cash and specifically assumed the mortgage note. The bank received notice of this transaction and elected not to exer-cise the optional due-on-sale clause in the mortgage. Without informing the man, the bank later released the woman from any further personal liability on the note. After he had owned the farm for a number of years, the man defaulted on the loan. The bank properly accelerated the loan, and the farm was eventually sold at a foreclosure sale for $500,000. Because there was still $600,000 owing on the note, the bank sued the man for the $100,000 deficiency. Is the man liable to the bank for the deficiency?

A young man suggested to his friend that they steal a large-screen TV from a neighbor�s house. The friend was angry with the young man and decided to use the opportunity to get even with him by having him arrested. The friend said he would help, and that night, he drove the young man to the neighbor�s house. The young man broke in while the friend remained out-side. The friend called the police on his cell phone and then drove away. Police officers arrived at the scene just as the young man was carrying the TV out the back door. The jurisdiction defines crimes as at common law. Of what crime, if any, can the friend properly be convicted?

A 50-year-old nurse who had been fired from his job at a hospital told his attorney, �I was fired because of my age, and I want to sue the hospital.� Based on this information, the attorney filed an age discrimination complaint against the hospital in federal court. As it turned out, the hospital had hired a 52-year-old man as the nurse�s replacement, a fact that rendered an age discrimination claim unavailable. The hospital responded to the complaint by filing a motion for sanctions against the nurse�s attorney. Is the court likely to grant the hospital�s motion?

A daughter was appointed guardian of her elderly father following an adjudication of his mental incompetence. The father had experienced periods of dementia during which he did not fully understand what he was doing. The father later contracted to purchase an automobile at a fair price from a seller who was unaware of the guardianship. At the time of the purchase, the father was lucid and fully understood the nature and purpose of the transaction. What is the legal status of the transaction?