Exception Overapplication
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 2 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
- Constitutional Law1
- Evidence1
Example wrong choices
14293_mootness-live-stream · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice ADefer action until after the state Supreme Court rules on the proper disposition, because the state law of mootness governs suits in federal court when the federal case is inexorably intertwined with a state proceeding.
Why it's attractive
Federal courts apply federal justiciability doctrines — there is no 'state law of mootness' governing federal courts.
Why it's wrong
Federal courts apply federal justiciability doctrines — there is no 'state law of mootness' governing federal courts.
14293_mootness-live-stream · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice CDeny the motion, because Timothy has raised an important constitutional question: whether his investment in a streaming subscription, purchased solely to view the trial, constitutes property protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Why it's attractive
A federal question does not create jurisdiction if the case is moot. Mootness defeats jurisdiction regardless of the importance of the issue.
Why it's wrong
A federal question does not create jurisdiction if the case is moot. Mootness defeats jurisdiction regardless of the importance of the issue.
14293_mootness-live-stream · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice DDefer action on the motion until after any appellate proceedings in the criminal case have concluded, because the defendant might appeal, the conviction might be set aside, a new trial might be ordered, and the streaming issue could resurface.
Why it's attractive
The chance of appellate reversal is too remote. No obvious errors means no strong likelihood of revival. Mootness does not yield to theoretical possibilities.
Why it's wrong
The chance of appellate reversal is too remote. No obvious errors means no strong likelihood of revival. Mootness does not yield to theoretical possibilities.
17106_scripture_mural_subpoena · EVIDENCE · Choice AYes. After a subpoena has been served, communications with counsel about the subpoena are outside the privilege.
Why it's attractive
It turns subpoena timing into an always/never privilege rule.
Why it's wrong
It turns subpoena timing into an always/never privilege rule.
17106_scripture_mural_subpoena · EVIDENCE · Choice BNo, but only because the meeting is protected as attorney work product rather than as an attorney-client communication.
Why it's attractive
It says no, but makes work product the only basis and denies the privilege named in the call.
Why it's wrong
It says no, but makes work product the only basis and denies the privilege named in the call.
17106_scripture_mural_subpoena · EVIDENCE · Choice DYes. The crime-fraud exception applies whenever a lawyer gives advice about documents that could be evidence.
Why it's attractive
It uses a real exception but omits the wrongful-purpose trigger.
Why it's wrong
It uses a real exception but omits the wrongful-purpose trigger.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →