← All traps
ArchitectureObserved in bank

Neighboring Doctrine Bait

This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 3 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

  • Contracts1
  • Evidence1
  • Real Property1

Example wrong choices

  • 14917_scripture_sign_parcel · REAL_PROPERTY · Choice Athe doctrine of equitable conversion applies.

    Why it's attractive

    The stem asks about no earnest money and consideration, not risk of loss or title conversion.

    Why it's wrong

    The stem asks about no earnest money and consideration, not risk of loss or title conversion.

  • 14917_scripture_sign_parcel · REAL_PROPERTY · Choice BNaomi recorded the agreement.

    Why it's attractive

    The recorded fact is visible, but the call asks why Stephen is bound despite no deposit.

    Why it's wrong

    The recorded fact is visible, but the call asks why Stephen is bound despite no deposit.

  • 14917_scripture_sign_parcel · REAL_PROPERTY · Choice DStephen's use of the parcel for the Bible-verse sign table constitutes part performance.

    Why it's attractive

    Stephen's sign-table use was permission, not the performance he owed under the sale agreement.

    Why it's wrong

    Stephen's sign-table use was permission, not the performance he owed under the sale agreement.

  • 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.

  • 19461_scriptorium_bay_assignment · CONTRACTS · Choice AMartha's accepting rent from Lydia resulted in an accord and satisfaction.

    Why it's attractive

    No new obligation on Peter was imposed and then satisfied.

    Why it's wrong

    No new obligation on Peter was imposed and then satisfied.

  • 19461_scriptorium_bay_assignment · CONTRACTS · Choice BA prohibition against assignment of Peter's leasehold interest would be a restraint against alienation.

    Why it's attractive

    The call asks for Peter's defense to unpaid rent, not whether an assignment restriction is valid.

    Why it's wrong

    The call asks for Peter's defense to unpaid rent, not whether an assignment restriction is valid.

  • 19461_scriptorium_bay_assignment · CONTRACTS · Choice DBy accepting rent from Lydia, Martha impliedly consented to Peter's assignment to Lydia.

    Why it's attractive

    Consent to assignment does not answer whether Peter was discharged.

    Why it's wrong

    Consent to assignment does not answer whether Peter was discharged.

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

Practice questions using this trap →
Neighboring Doctrine Bait — Trap Taxonomy | BarMatrix