← All traps
ArchitectureObserved in bank

Absent Defendant Test Applied To Present Defendant

This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 1 active question. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”

Subject distribution

  • Civil Procedure1

Example wrong choices

  • 18826_daniels_market_fair · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice ANo, because Daniel was in State B only to attend the market fair and to visit his brother.

    Why it's attractive

    Invokes a true PJ rule (minimum contacts) that governs absent defendants, not one served in-state; right area, wrong basis in play.

    Why it's wrong

    Invokes a true PJ rule (minimum contacts) that governs absent defendants, not one served in-state; right area, wrong basis in play.

  • 18826_daniels_market_fair · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice BNo, because nothing indicates that Daniel consented to jurisdiction in State B.

    Why it's attractive

    Treats absence of consent as fatal; consent is one basis among several, so its absence cannot defeat PJ when another basis is met.

    Why it's wrong

    Treats absence of consent as fatal; consent is one basis among several, so its absence cannot defeat PJ when another basis is met.

  • 18826_daniels_market_fair · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice CYes, because Lydia filed her lawsuit in a State B court.

    Why it's attractive

    Where the plaintiff files is not power over the defendant — a non-sequitur; if filing conferred PJ, the requirement would be meaningless.

    Why it's wrong

    Where the plaintiff files is not power over the defendant — a non-sequitur; if filing conferred PJ, the requirement would be meaningless.

Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.

Practice questions using this trap →
Absent Defendant Test Applied To Present Defendant — Trap Taxonomy | BarMatrix