Fre 615 A 1 Stops Reading
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
- Evidence1
Example wrong choices
17181_galilee-fishing-fre615 · EVIDENCE · Choice APermit Matthew to remain automatically because any employee who knows company records is exempt from sequestration.
Why it's attractive
Needs Gold Key to defeat: Matthew's familiarity with vessel logs feels like a concrete operational necessity. Without the anchor, the showing requirement is invisible.
Why it's wrong
Needs Gold Key to defeat: Matthew's familiarity with vessel logs feels like a concrete operational necessity. Without the anchor, the showing requirement is invisible.
17181_galilee-fishing-fre615 · EVIDENCE · Choice BExclude both John and Matthew, because Galilee Fishing, LLC is not a natural person.
Why it's attractive
Reads 615(a)(1) (natural person exempt) and stops. Overlooks 615(a)(2) which specifically provides for a non-natural party's designated representative.
Why it's wrong
Reads 615(a)(1) (natural person exempt) and stops. Overlooks 615(a)(2) which specifically provides for a non-natural party's designated representative.
17181_galilee-fishing-fre615 · EVIDENCE · Choice DPermit both John and Matthew to remain because a non-natural party may keep all its employee-witnesses in the courtroom.
Why it's attractive
Reads 615(a)(2) as giving entity parties unlimited employee exemptions. The text says 'an' officer or employee — singular. 'All employees' would nullify sequestration for every corporate litigant.
Why it's wrong
Reads 615(a)(2) as giving entity parties unlimited employee exemptions. The text says 'an' officer or employee — singular. 'All employees' would nullify sequestration for every corporate litigant.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →