2018

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/admissions/FYLSX_Oct2018_SelectedAnswers_R.pdf

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/admissions/fyx/FYLSX_Jun2018_SelectedAnswers.pdf

June 2018 Question 1 [Contracts]

Seller sells imported food products to local food distributors like Buyer. Seller and Buyer entered into a valid written contract under which Seller promised to deliver to Buyer “on or before May 1 of this year, 2,500 pounds of Canadian wild rice, packed in 100-pound sacks, at $6.00 per pound, total price -- $15,000.” Buyer, a supporter of the local nonprofit Food Bank, insisted on a provision in the contract stating, “In addition to the quantity of goods to be delivered by Seller to Buyer under this contract, Seller agrees to deliver free of any charge an additional 200 pounds of the identical product to Food Bank.” Immediately after Buyer informed Food Bank of Seller’s promise to deliver the 200 pounds of Canadian wild rice, Food Bank decided to use the rice as part of its upcoming fundraising campaign. Food Bank spent $300 for 200 one-pound bags that were labeled “Famous Canadian Wild Rice — Thank You from The Food Bank.” It planned to send letters to 200 donors offering a bag of the Canadian rice to anyone who contributed at least $50, believing that the campaign would raise $10,000. On May 1, Seller delivered 2,500 pounds of Canadian wild rice to Buyer. However, the rice was packed in 50-kilogram sacks that contained 110.2 pounds each. Seller’s agent explained to Buyer that his Canadian producer had recently switched to metric weights because it now exports much of its wild rice to Europe. Buyer refused to accept the delivery. The next day Buyer sent a fax to Seller stating, “Because you failed to satisfy your obligations under our contract, I hereby terminate our purchase agreement.” Seller believes Buyer refused to accept the delivery because Buyer had found a cheaper source of Canadian wild rice. A few days later Buyer purchased 2,500 pounds of Canadian wild rice from another supplier for $4.00 per pound. After Seller failed to deliver the Canadian wild rice to Food Bank following Buyer’s rejection, Food Bank was unable to find any other affordable source and had to suspend the fundraising effort.

1. Can Food Bank enforce the contract between Buyer and Seller? Discuss.

2. What, if any, defenses does Seller have? Discuss. 3. What, if any, relief can Food Bank seek? Discuss.

June 2018 Question 2 [Criminal Law]

In July 2015, Carole broke her neck and became disabled when she dove into a swimming pool manufactured by Swim Wonder and struck the bottom. In September 2016, Carole hired Larry, a lawyer, to negotiate with her health insurer, which was slow in paying her medical bills. Larry suggested filing a claim against Swim Wonder for negligence in its design of the pool. Carole agreed. In September 2017, Carole, who had heard nothing about the negligence claim, contacted Larry. Larry informed Carole that he intended to file her claim, but recently learned that her claim was barred by the two-year statute of limitations. Carole has sued Larry for legal malpractice. 1. Is Carole likely to prevail? Discuss. 2. If Carole does prevail, how will her damages be determined? Discuss.

June 2018 Question 3 [Criminal Law]

For some time, Alex has owned an old, wooden cottage that needs repainting about every 5 years. Brad paints houses for a living and had seen Alex’s cottage, although he had never painted it. Alex called Brad and offered to pay Brad $10,000 to paint Alex’s cottage, provided that he could do so within the next 30 days. Alex told Brad that “the reason that I always get my cottage painted every 5 years is that it has always only needed one coat of paint.” Brad then agreed orally to paint Alex’s cottage within the next 30 days for $10,000. The next day Brad signed a written contract and left it with Alex. The contract did not specify how many coats of paint would be needed, only that Brad would paint Alex’s cottage within the next 30 days for $10,000. Alex never signed the contract, but watched later that week as Brad began painting the cottage. Brad painted the cottage in one week, but by that time the wood had soaked up the first coat of paint, so the cottage looked unpainted and terrible. The cottage would have looked fine with one more coat of paint, but Brad demanded $10,000 for his work and refused to add another coat of paint unless Alex paid another $10,000. Alex is unhappy and refuses to pay Brad anything. Alex then hires Charles who puts the second coat of paint on the cottage for $7,500. Brad sues Alex for $10,000 and Alex files a counterclaim for $7,500. 1. What arguments can Brad reasonably make in support of his lawsuit and against Alex’s counterclaim? Discuss. 2. What arguments can Alex reasonably make in support of his counterclaim and in response to Brad’s lawsuit? Discuss. 3. What will be the likely outcome of Brad’s lawsuit and of Alex’s counterclaim? Discuss.

June 2018 Question 4 [Criminal Law]

Al, Bob, and Carl are members of a group opposed to nuclear power. They decide to break into the Gigantic Power Company (GPC) headquarters at night, remove a model of a proposed nuclear plant, and hang it in effigy in a conspicuous location. Unknown to Al and Carl, Bob intends to plant a bomb in the headquarters at the same time. Two hours before they are to leave for GPC’s headquarters, Al tells Bob and Carl that he will not participate in the break-in. Bob and Carl respond that they will go ahead without him. Bob and Carl break into GPC’s headquarters and remove the model. Bob, unseen by Carl, plants a small bomb, which is set to explode at 4:00 a.m., when Bob believes the building will be unoccupied. As Bob and Carl are driving away, they are spotted by GPC’s security personnel, who drive after them. After a short pursuit, Bob and Carl jump from their car and run toward an apartment building. Bob pulls out two guns (which Carl did not know Bob had) and tosses one to Carl. Bob then grabs apartment tenant Hostage, who is walking to his car, and forces him back toward the building. Carl pleads with Bob to let Hostage go, but Bob says, “Get in here or I’ll shoot you.” Bob turns his back and takes Hostage into the building and Carl follows. The police arrive, and Bob shoots at them; Carl does not. Carl finally convinces Bob to let Hostage go. As Hostage is running from the building, he is shot and killed by the police who mistake him for a suspect. At GPC headquarters, the bomb fails to explode and is safely disarmed by the bomb squad. 1. With what crimes, if any, can Al be reasonably charged, and what defenses, if any, can he reasonably raise? Discuss. 2. With what crimes, if any, can Bob be reasonably charged, and what defenses, if any, can he reasonably raise? Discuss. 3. With what crimes, if any, can Carl be reasonably charged, and what defenses, if any, can he reasonably raise? Discuss.

October 2018 Question 1 [Criminal Law]

Becky is a highly employable and well-known bourbon distiller who has worked at several distilleries. One year ago she was offered and she accepted, a job as Chief Distiller at the Western Sky Distillery (Western Sky), at a salary of $200,000 annually, for five years, provided that if her employment is terminated early, she will receive $400,000 per year in damages for the remaining term of her contract. Becky and Western Sky signed a complete employment contract with those terms. However, two things have just happened: First, the growing popularity of distilleries over the past 10 years has led to a worldwide shortage of oak barrels, which are required to age and produce bourbon. That shortage will in fact persist for at least several years or more, until such time as the barrel manufacturers will have increased production. Western Sky will now cease production of bourbon, and it has fired Becky for that reason. Western Sky does not deny the existence and validity of its contract with Becky. Second, Becky has been offered a full time job as the host of a television show about bourbon producers, at a salary of $100,000 for four years. Although the salary is less than she was paid at Western Sky, she is unable to find another job as a bourbon distiller because of the oak barrel shortage. Becky has decided to take the television host job and to sue Western Sky.

1. What claims will Becky make and what remedies will she request? Discuss.

2. What defenses, if any, will Western Sky raise in its response to Becky’s lawsuit? Discuss.

3. What will be the likely outcome of the case? Discuss.

October 2018 Question 2 [Criminal Law]

Andrew is facing charges of battery against his ex-girlfriend, Belle. Andrew asks his present girlfriend, Claire, to help him convince Belle to testify that the battery never happened. Andrew and Claire agree that he will call Belle and ask her to meet him at his place of work. Claire will be waiting in the parking lot to confront Belle and ask her not to testify against Andrew. Andrew makes the call and Belle agrees to meet Andrew in the parking lot of his work. Claire is waiting in her car in the parking lot. When Belle arrives, Claire gets out of her car and confronts Belle. She yells at her to withdraw her complaint against Andrew. Andrew comes out of the building and tells Claire to get Belle. Belle has a knife on her. She brought it with her for protection. When Belle sees Claire coming over to her, she brandishes the knife. Angry words are exchanged and each one threatens the other. Claire goes back to her car, gets a baseball bat out of the back seat and goes after Belle. Belle stabs Claire with her knife, causing serious bodily injury. The police are called. Andrew and Belle are arrested and Claire is transported to the hospital, where she later dies from her wounds.

1. With what crimes, if any, can Andrew and Belle be reasonably charged? Discuss.

2. Do Andrew or Belle have any defenses? Discuss.

October 2018 Question 3 [Criminal Law]

Neighbor has owned property in Mountain Town since 1965. BlastCo is a blasting company situated in Mountain Town and has been in operation since 1970. In 1980, Pet Farm moved its bunny farm into Mountain Town and began to breed bunnies for sale as pets. Pet Farm is situated just outside of the city limits, in the rural portion of Mountain Town. The property next to Pet Farm is a residential property owned by Neighbor. In 2015, Neighbor purchased a classic 1957 Jeep Willys automobile to restore as a hobby. By 2017, the jeep was almost finished, waiting for installation of brakes and wood paneling on the doors. It was perched at the top of Neighbor’s steep driveway with its front wheels improperly secured by blocks. Once completed, the jeep would be worth $50,000. On March 3, 2017, BlastCo was blasting a new train tunnel about 3 miles from the properties owned by Pet Farm and Neighbor. While blasting, an unusual jolt occurred, which caused Neighbor’s jeep to jump off its blocks and roll down the driveway. Neighbor was not home at the time. Neighbor’s jeep careened across the street and entered Pet Farm’s property by busting through a thin wooden fence. While on Pet Farm property, Neighbor’s jeep ran over and killed 22 Holland Lop rabbits owned by Pet Farm, worth about $100 each. The jeep eventually came to rest at the bottom of a ravine, damaged beyond repair. When Neighbor returned home, he saw the gaping hole in the fence and immediately called his lawyer. What claims and defenses, if any, do Neighbor, BlastCo, and Pet Farm have against each other, and what damages can be recovered? Discuss.

October 2018 Question 4 [Criminal Law]

Curley, Larry and Moe were discussing plans to rob Bank. Moe and Larry agreed to do the robbery, but Curley said that he would think about it. Moe and Larry, however, asked Curley to at least drive them to the Bank in his car, and Curley agreed to do so. On the planned day, the three drove to the Bank. Curley remained outside, sitting in the car waiting for his two friends. Once inside, Larry noticed that the armed Bank guard was approaching them. Larry pulled out his gun, fired at the guard but missed, while the bullet hit and killed a customer. Moe then shot the guard dead. Outside, Curley decided to call the police on his cell phone and told them about the ongoing crime and drove away. Inside, Larry and Moe ordered Teller at gunpoint to give them a sack of money. Fleeing outside, but noticing that Curley had left, Larry and Moe dragged a driver out from a nearby car and drove away with the money. Moe, Larry and Curley were later captured by the police. With what crimes should Moe, Larry, and Curley each be charged, and what defenses might each one raise? Discuss.