Ear Falsity
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 142 active questions. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- CRIMINAL52
- Contracts28
- Evidence25
- Real Property19
- Torts9
- Constitutional Law7
- Civil Procedure2
Example wrong choices
first 2014286_human-cannonball-barnabas · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice Dhold against the performer, because under the First and Fourteenth Amendments news broadcasts are absolutely privileged.
Why it's attractive
Constitutional privileges for the press are never absolute. 'Always/never/only' formulations are structural red flags.
Why it's wrong
Constitutional privileges for the press are never absolute. 'Always/never/only' formulations are structural red flags.
14392_tutor-typist-land · CONTRACTS · Choice AThere is no enforceable contract, because Timothy is entitled to rescission due to a mutual mistake as to a basic assumption of the contract.
Why it's attractive
The stem says only Timothy was mistaken. Peter was not mistaken about anything. 'Mutual' requires both.
Why it's wrong
The stem says only Timothy was mistaken. Peter was not mistaken about anything. 'Mutual' requires both.
14399_shepherd-psalm-transform · CONTRACTS · Choice APeter wins, because Daniel impliedly warranted that the ram was fit for breeding purposes.
Why it's attractive
Both parties knew fertility was untestable; no reliance on seller's expertise
Why it's wrong
Both parties knew fertility was untestable; no reliance on seller's expertise
14425_accommodating-shipment · CONTRACTS · Choice BBarnabas may accept the maple, in which case he must pay Timothy the full price, less any damages sustained because of the nonconforming shipment, or he must reject the maple and recover from Timothy for total breach of contract.
Why it's attractive
choice assumes Timothy breached by shipping nonconforming goods but ignores the accommodation notice
Why it's wrong
choice assumes Timothy breached by shipping nonconforming goods but ignores the accommodation notice
14436_telescope-ruth-original · CONTRACTS · Choice ANothing, because there was no new consideration for Ruth's promise after she reached the age of majority.
Why it's attractive
The choice says 'no new consideration.' You know that a post-majority ratification is enforceable without new consideration. This choice fabricates a requirement that the rule specifically eliminates.
Why it's wrong
The choice says 'no new consideration.' You know that a post-majority ratification is enforceable without new consideration. This choice fabricates a requirement that the rule specifically eliminates.
14468_waiver-of-notice-condition · CONTRACTS · Choice CNonoccurrence of a condition subsequent.
Why it's attractive
The condition must occur BEFORE the contract is effective; that's precedent, not subsequent
Why it's wrong
The condition must occur BEFORE the contract is effective; that's precedent, not subsequent
14468_waiver-of-notice-condition · CONTRACTS · Choice DNovation of buyers.
Why it's attractive
The stem never mentions any new party replacing an original party
Why it's wrong
The stem never mentions any new party replacing an original party
14499_impossibility-restitution · CONTRACTS · Choice AOnly Timothy's contractual duty is discharged, because Lydia's obligation to pay cash is not impossible to perform.
Why it's attractive
The choice says only Timothy's duty is discharged because Lydia can still hand over cash. But impossibility of the subject matter discharges BOTH sides. If the thing to be built is destroyed, the buyer's payment obligation is also excused.
Why it's wrong
The choice says only Timothy's duty is discharged because Lydia can still hand over cash. But impossibility of the subject matter discharges BOTH sides. If the thing to be built is destroyed, the buyer's payment obligation is also excused.
14512_used-boat-sale · CONTRACTS · Choice DNo, because the seller did not affirmatively assert that the boat had not been in an accident.
Why it's wrong
Choice D is not the credited answer for this item.
14551_tent-maker-pledge · CONTRACTS · Choice ANo, because Paul's death terminated Lydia's right to receive payment directly from Timothy.
Why it's attractive
Assumes rights existed that were terminated — but no assignment ever took effect
Why it's wrong
Assumes rights existed that were terminated — but no assignment ever took effect
14559_warrant-esther · CRIMINAL · Choice BYes — violates self-incrimination privilege
Why it's wrong
Choice B is not the credited answer for this item.
14585_boathouse_fire · CRIMINAL · Choice BYes, because although Peter did not effectively assert the right to counsel, his conduct before making the statement did not constitute a valid waiver of his Miranda rights.
Why it's attractive
Invents a waiver problem after the facts already gave a yes.
Why it's wrong
Invents a waiver problem after the facts already gave a yes.
14594_consent-plainview-tapestry · CRIMINAL · Choice AYes, because the officers' entry into the home was the fruit of an illegal search of Stephen, and the evidence found inside the house is tainted.
Why it's wrong
Choice A is not the credited answer for this item.
14694_factual-impossibility-hunter · CRIMINAL · Choice DNot guilty of attempted murder, or any lesser included offense, because under the circumstances it was impossible for Peter to have killed Barnabas.
Why it's attractive
Factual impossibility is NOT a defense to attempt. This is one of the most commonly tested MBE traps. If the defendant didn't know the facts made it impossible, the intent is still there.
Why it's wrong
Factual impossibility is NOT a defense to attempt. This is one of the most commonly tested MBE traps. If the defendant didn't know the facts made it impossible, the intent is still there.
14777_christian-variance · EVIDENCE · Choice Dadmissible, as evidence of a statement by a party-opponent.
Why it's wrong
Choice D is not the credited answer for this item.
14793_christian-variation · EVIDENCE · Choice ANo, because it is hearsay not within any exception.
Why it's wrong
Choice A is not the credited answer for this item.
14833_peter-harp-luthier · EVIDENCE · Choice Dadmissible, because Peter's expert had been able to examine the soundboard carefully.
Why it's attractive
The expert's examination is irrelevant to Paul's competency — a witness's personal knowledge is established by their own perception, not someone else's
Why it's wrong
The expert's examination is irrelevant to Paul's competency — a witness's personal knowledge is established by their own perception, not someone else's
14836_picnic_alibi · EVIDENCE · Choice Badmissible, in the judge's discretion, because the friend's credibility is a fact of major consequence to the case.
Why it's attractive
CUT: 'major consequence' / 'judge's discretion' is 403 vocabulary; FRE 608(b) is a structural bar, not a balancing test.
Why it's wrong
CUT: 'major consequence' / 'judge's discretion' is 403 vocabulary; FRE 608(b) is a structural bar, not a balancing test.
14836_picnic_alibi · EVIDENCE · Choice Dadmissible, as a matter of right, because the friend 'opened the door' by her denial on cross-examination.
Why it's attractive
CUT: 'opening the door' permits further cross-examination inquiry, not separate-witness extrinsic proof. The C3 move is to notice the prosecutor CALLED A SEPARATE WITNESS.
Why it's wrong
CUT: 'opening the door' permits further cross-examination inquiry, not separate-witness extrinsic proof. The C3 move is to notice the prosecutor CALLED A SEPARATE WITNESS.
14841_witness-sequestration-tort · EVIDENCE · Choice DThe judge allows cross-examination about the credibility of a witness even though no question relating to credibility was asked on direct examination.
Why it's attractive
FRE 611(b) says credibility matters are always proper on cross, regardless of direct
Why it's wrong
FRE 611(b) says credibility matters are always proper on cross, regardless of direct
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →