Sounds Lawyerly
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 26 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
- CRIMINAL11
- Contracts6
- Real Property6
- Evidence2
- Civil Procedure1
Example wrong choices
first 2014068_retreat_canoe · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice ANo, Paul does not have a right to a jury trial as to any claim because the case is essentially equitable because of the request for injunctive relief.
Why it's attractive
Students remember injunctions are equitable and overextend that memory to the whole case.
Why it's wrong
CUT: one equitable remedy cannot swallow the legal damages claim.
14068_retreat_canoe · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice DNo, Paul does not have a right to a jury trial as to any claim because none of them bear exclusively upon equitable relief.
Why it's attractive
The phrase 'exclusively upon equitable relief' sounds technical and law-like.
Why it's wrong
CUT: the reason points the wrong way.
14397_fish_keychains · CONTRACTS · Choice AYes, because Lydia relied on an implied promise to pay when she brought the keychains to Daniel.
Why it's attractive
The choice talks about seller reliance, but the call asks enforceability against a buyer who refused the goods.
Why it's wrong
The choice talks about seller reliance, but the call asks enforceability against a buyer who refused the goods.
14397_fish_keychains · CONTRACTS · Choice BNo, because the parties never agreed on the price of the keychains.
Why it's attractive
Gold Key: missing price alone does not defeat a sale-of-goods contract.
Why it's wrong
Gold Key: missing price alone does not defeat a sale-of-goods contract.
14397_fish_keychains · CONTRACTS · Choice CYes, because leaving the price open does not prevent a valid sale-of-goods contract when the parties otherwise intended to contract.
Why it's attractive
Silver Key: the choice answers formation, not the enforceability writing gate.
Why it's wrong
Silver Key: the choice answers formation, not the enforceability writing gate.
14401_psalm_van_repair · CONTRACTS · Choice AYes, because Ruth's promise to Peter was oral.
Why it's attractive
The answer stops at the first oral promise and ignores the later signed note.
Why it's wrong
The answer stops at the first oral promise and ignores the later signed note.
14401_psalm_van_repair · CONTRACTS · Choice BNo, because the amount of the repair bill was less than $5,000.
Why it's attractive
The call is about a guarantor's writing, not a dollar safe harbor.
Why it's wrong
The call is about a guarantor's writing, not a dollar safe harbor.
14401_psalm_van_repair · CONTRACTS · Choice CYes, because Matthew's promise to Peter was oral.
Why it's attractive
Peter sued Ruth; Matthew's oral promise is not the dispositive writing question.
Why it's wrong
Peter sued Ruth; Matthew's oral promise is not the dispositive writing question.
14406_advent_lanterns · CONTRACTS · Choice ANo contract was formed, because Lydia Supply’s purchase order was merely a revocable offer.
Why it's attractive
The choice points to pre-acceptance revocability, but the stem gives acceptance and no cancellation.
Why it's wrong
The choice points to pre-acceptance revocability, but the stem gives acceptance and no cancellation.
14406_advent_lanterns · CONTRACTS · Choice BA contract was formed, but before August 12 it was an option contract cancelable only at Lydia Supply’s election.
Why it's attractive
The choice reaches for a familiar label after seeing one-sided cancellation.
Why it's wrong
The choice reaches for a familiar label after seeing one-sided cancellation.
14406_advent_lanterns · CONTRACTS · Choice DA contract was formed, but before August 12 it was terminable at the election of either party.
Why it's attractive
The cancellation right belongs only to Lydia Supply.
Why it's wrong
The cancellation right belongs only to Lydia Supply.
14412_gospel_puzzle_invoice · CONTRACTS · Choice AYes, because a promise allowing Lydia to postpone payment of a past-due fee is enforceable without consideration.
Why it's attractive
The choice says the delay promise works without consideration; the Gold Key says same debt later is not new consideration.
Why it's wrong
The choice says the delay promise works without consideration; the Gold Key says same debt later is not new consideration.
14412_gospel_puzzle_invoice · CONTRACTS · Choice CYes, because Lydia bargained for Stephen’s forbearance.
Why it's attractive
The choice proves Lydia wanted forbearance, but the call needs new consideration from Lydia.
Why it's wrong
The choice proves Lydia wanted forbearance, but the call needs new consideration from Lydia.
14412_gospel_puzzle_invoice · CONTRACTS · Choice DNo, because there was no consideration to support Lydia’s promise to pay $1,840 on November 15.
Why it's attractive
The choice points the missing-consideration problem at Lydia’s promise instead of Stephen’s promise.
Why it's wrong
The choice points the missing-consideration problem at Lydia’s promise instead of Stephen’s promise.
14417_scripture_puzzle_job · CONTRACTS · Choice ANo, because the tour logistics job Ruth took was not substantially comparable to the puzzle-writer job she had agreed to take.
Why it's attractive
The choice compares the second job instead of answering whether Ruth had a duty to stay.
Why it's wrong
The choice compares the second job instead of answering whether Ruth had a duty to stay.
14417_scripture_puzzle_job · CONTRACTS · Choice BYes, because Ruth's failure to give Barnabas a chance to match the higher salary breached an implied right of first refusal.
Why it's attractive
The stem never creates a matching right.
Why it's wrong
The stem never creates a matching right.
14417_scripture_puzzle_job · CONTRACTS · Choice DYes, because Ruth's acceptance of a permanent position meant that she agreed to stay with Barnabas for a reasonable time.
Why it's attractive
The choice reads permanent in the opposite legal direction.
Why it's wrong
The choice reads permanent in the opposite legal direction.
14506_lydia_rooftop_loft · CONTRACTS · Choice ANo, because Mary breached by failing to tender the deed and possession on March 4.
Why it's attractive
It proves a breach but not that the breach ends the whole deal.
Why it's wrong
It proves a breach but not that the breach ends the whole deal.
14506_lydia_rooftop_loft · CONTRACTS · Choice BNo, because Mary has an adequate remedy at law for money damages.
Why it's attractive
This requires the land-specific performance Gold Key.
Why it's wrong
This requires the land-specific performance Gold Key.
14506_lydia_rooftop_loft · CONTRACTS · Choice CYes, because the court will excuse Mary's late tender as temporary impossibility caused by Lydia's wrongful holdover.
Why it's attractive
It answers through excuse doctrine instead of partial breach/time-not-essential.
Why it's wrong
It answers through excuse doctrine instead of partial breach/time-not-essential.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →