← All traps
ArchitectureObserved in bank

Half Truth Dominant

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

  • Torts2

Example wrong choices

  • 15238_church-fireworks-timothy · TORTS · Choice Cprevail, because Timothy acted reasonably to retrieve his dog from a dangerous area.

    Why it's attractive

    Sympathetic motivation does not equal legally reasonable conduct.

    Why it's wrong

    Sympathetic motivation does not equal legally reasonable conduct.

  • 15238_church-fireworks-timothy · TORTS · Choice Dnot prevail, because Paul took reasonable precautions by erecting barriers and posting warning signs.

    Why it's attractive

    Right outcome, wrong reason. In strict liability, defendant's precautions don't matter.

    Why it's wrong

    Right outcome, wrong reason. In strict liability, defendant's precautions don't matter.

  • 21581_covenant-settlement · TORTS · Choice AWhen the adjuster made the statements to the husband, the adjuster knew or should have known that the statements were false.

    Why it's attractive

    Proves fault element but says nothing about damages; a required element is missing

    Why it's wrong

    Proves fault element but says nothing about damages; a required element is missing

  • 21581_covenant-settlement · TORTS · Choice BIf the husband's wrongful death suit had not been dismissed, it would have resulted in a judgment for the husband in excess of $1,000.

    Why it's attractive

    Proves damages element but says nothing about adjuster's knowledge; a required element is missing

    Why it's wrong

    Proves damages element but says nothing about adjuster's knowledge; a required element is missing

  • 21581_covenant-settlement · TORTS · Choice CThe husband doesn't have to prove either that his lawsuit would have resulted in a judgment in excess of $1,000 or that the adjuster knew or should have known the statements were false.

    Why it's attractive

    Claims no proof of fault or damages is needed; this contradicts the basic elements of misrepresentation

    Why it's wrong

    Claims no proof of fault or damages is needed; this contradicts the basic elements of misrepresentation

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

Practice questions using this trap →
Half Truth Dominant — Trap Taxonomy | BarMatrix