Wrong Frame
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 784 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
- CRIMINAL195
- Evidence126
- Real Property126
- Contracts125
- Constitutional Law81
- Torts50
- Civil Procedure41
- Criminal Law40
Example wrong choices
first 2014014_scripture_cart_jury_poll · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice AYes, because contributory negligence is not a defense in a federal negligence action.
Why it's attractive
The answer talks about contributory negligence as a defense, but the call asks whether the appeal will be heard.
Why it's wrong
The answer talks about contributory negligence as a defense, but the call asks whether the appeal will be heard.
14062_stephens-orchard-late-changed-charge · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice BNo, because Stephen's objection was untimely, and any alleged error would have been upheld under the "clearly erroneous" standard of review.
Why it's attractive
Pairs the same false 'untimely' premise with an appellate buzzword; the 'clearly erroneous' label is the tell.
Why it's wrong
Pairs the same false 'untimely' premise with an appellate buzzword; the 'clearly erroneous' label is the tell.
14071_threshing-sledge-patent · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice BThe judgment cannot stand because the Seventh Amendment does not apply to patent infringement suits seeking money damages.
Why it's attractive
Says the jury right does NOT reach a money-damages action; that is the opposite of the rule.
Why it's wrong
Says the jury right does NOT reach a money-damages action; that is the opposite of the rule.
14090_federal_military_property_duty_defense · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice DNo, because federal choice-of-law rules require application of State A tort law, which provides Ruth a valid claim.
Why it's wrong
Choice D is not the credited answer for this item.
14178_choir_robe_credit_good_faith · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice ANo, because Mary's complaint is factually inconsistent regarding whether John lied.
Why it's attractive
The stem's good-faith problem is not merely that John's truthfulness is uncertain; it is Mary's own mutually exclusive reliance allegations.
Why it's wrong
The stem's good-faith problem is not merely that John's truthfulness is uncertain; it is Mary's own mutually exclusive reliance allegations.
14178_choir_robe_credit_good_faith · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice DYes, because alternative and inconsistent allegations are permitted when the pleading party does not have knowledge that only one of the allegations is true.
Why it's attractive
Rule 8 permission is real, but it is not a blanket shield against Rule 11 good-faith certification.
Why it's wrong
Rule 8 permission is real, but it is not a blanket shield against Rule 11 good-faith certification.
14188_homeschool_discipleship_kit_files · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice DNo, because Ruth did not define the words "advertising strategy" in her request for the documents.
Why it's wrong
Choice D is not the credited answer for this item.
14216_retreat_shuttle · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice ANo. Issue preclusion will not bind Lydia, but claim preclusion may bar her negligence claim.
Why it's attractive
It gets the nonparty issue-preclusion cut right, then wrongly reaches for claim preclusion.
Why it's wrong
It gets the nonparty issue-preclusion cut right, then wrongly reaches for claim preclusion.
14216_retreat_shuttle · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice CYes. Lydia will be precluded from relitigating whether Barnabas negligently backed into the tent.
Why it's attractive
It treats an ambiguous general verdict as a clear decision against a later nonparty.
Why it's wrong
It treats an ambiguous general verdict as a clear decision against a later nonparty.
14216_retreat_shuttle · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice DYes. Barnabas will be precluded from relitigating whether he negligently backed into the tent.
Why it's attractive
It treats party status alone as enough for issue preclusion.
Why it's wrong
It treats party status alone as enough for issue preclusion.
14222_piano_tutor_counterclaim_default · CIVIL_PROCEDURE · Choice BYes, because Martha's counterclaim was for an exact dollar amount.
Why it's attractive
B uses the sum-certain fact but ignores Peter's filing of the original complaint.
Why it's wrong
B uses the sum-certain fact but ignores Peter's filing of the original complaint.
14229_daily-bread-depot · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice AUnconstitutional, because the burden was on the city to demonstrate that this condition was necessary to vindicate a compelling governmental interest, and the city failed to meet that burden.
Why it's attractive
Strict scrutiny language answers a neighboring constitutional question, not this exaction.
Why it's wrong
Strict scrutiny language answers a neighboring constitutional question, not this exaction.
14229_daily-bread-depot · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice CConstitutional, because the burden was on Daniel to demonstrate that there was no rational relationship between this condition and a legitimate governmental interest, and Daniel could not do so because the condition is reasonably related to improving the lives of families and children in the city.
Why it's attractive
Rational basis is the wrong lane once the city demands a give-back for a permit.
Why it's wrong
Rational basis is the wrong lane once the city demands a give-back for a permit.
14231_hymn-trailer-premium · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice ANo, because the different theft rates in the two areas provide a rational basis for the different premiums.
Why it's attractive
A reaches scrutiny before asking whether equal protection reaches this private defendant.
Why it's wrong
A reaches scrutiny before asking whether equal protection reaches this private defendant.
14231_hymn-trailer-premium · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice CYes, because the higher theft rate in Martha's neighborhood shows that the county sheriff is not giving residents there the equal protection of the laws.
Why it's attractive
The suit targets the insurer, but C turns the case into a sheriff-protection claim.
Why it's wrong
The suit targets the insurer, but C turns the case into a sheriff-protection claim.
14231_hymn-trailer-premium · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice DYes, because charging a higher premium based on a customer's residential area is inherently discriminatory.
Why it's attractive
D treats unfair private pricing as automatically constitutional discrimination.
Why it's wrong
D treats unfair private pricing as automatically constitutional discrimination.
14233_galilee_nets_fieldhouse · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice BThe intense public preoccupation with professional e-sports teams, coupled with the fact that live gaming finals have become a favorite modern pastime, is sufficient to justify application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the activities of professional e-sports teams.
Why it's attractive
The choice turns public interest and cultural status into state power.
Why it's wrong
The choice turns public interest and cultural status into state power.
14233_galilee_nets_fieldhouse · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice DThe nexus between the contracting decisions of the team owners and the one-time grant of state funds is sufficiently substantial to subject those decisions to the limitations of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Why it's attractive
The choice treats the state grant as enough even though the owners made the contractor-selection decision.
Why it's wrong
The choice treats the state grant as enough even though the owners made the contractor-selection decision.
14234_barnabas-house · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice ABecause the commission's action effectively discriminates against a quasi-suspect class in relation to a basic subsistence need, the commission must prove that the denial is substantially related to an important governmental interest.
Why it's attractive
Choice creates quasi-suspect/basic-subsistence trigger not supplied by the taught anchor.
Why it's wrong
Choice creates quasi-suspect/basic-subsistence trigger not supplied by the taught anchor.
14234_barnabas-house · CONSTITUTIONAL_LAW · Choice CBecause housing is a fundamental right, the commission must prove that the denial is necessary to serve a compelling governmental interest.
Why it's attractive
Choice depends on a Gold Key the doctrine rejects.
Why it's wrong
Choice depends on a Gold Key the doctrine rejects.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →