sample multiple-choice question
Sample Bar Exam Question: Funny Porn Movie Title Edition
The bar exam is in just five days. I’m reviewing dozens, sometimes hundreds, of multiple-choice questions every day. Now, for those of you who have no idea what a bar exam multiple-choice question looks like, I figured I might share one with you.
This particular question comes from MicroMash, which is kind of like Princeton Review for the bar exam, only without the classes. Law students, lawyers, and prospective law students are encouraged to leave their answers to the question in the ‘comments’ section below:
If the plaintiff was unable to show bad faith or other extraordinary circumstances, in which of the following situations would a federal district court assume jurisdiction?
A. Plaintiff M has been indicted in a state court for showing an obscene motion picture, “Sore Throat.” He brings an order to the federal district court seeking to enjoin the state prosecution.
B. Plaintiff N is the operator of a motion picture theater. The attorney general of the state has commenced a civil action to enjoin the showing of a motion picture, “The Bevel in Miss Jones,” on the ground that it is obscene. He applies to the federal district court seeking to enjoin the state civil proceeding.
C. Plaintiff O is the operator of a motion picture theater. The local law enforcement officer has informed him that if he shows “De Flowering Inferno” again, he will be prosecuted for obscenity. He brings an action in the federal district court for a declaratory judgment that the picture is not obscene.
D. Plaintiff P has been convinced in the trial court of State X for showing “Sin For Your Supper.” While the case is on appeal to the supreme court of that state, he brings an action in the federal district court seeking to enjoin the state proceeding.
Technorati Tags: Bookmark/Search this post with:
I'll preface my answer by
I'll preface my answer by stating I'm an 0L, LS next year, so no laughing!!
I choose: B
Don't like "A" because if there is no "bad faith" then why not let it go through the state court(s), allowing a community to set the standard
C: A threat by a LEO without being able to show "bad faith", seems like a non starter, immunity
D: reasoning similar to "A", it's already in process and waiting for State supreme, why claim jurisdiction
It would probably help if I understood Jurisdiction :) Still trying to wrap my head around it. Let the slaughter ensue!
In an actual law-practice
In an actual law-practice situation, my answer would be, "I'll be right back," and then I would go look up the answer, something I am very very good at doing, and someone would pay our firm probably hundreds of dollars for that. Under bar-exam-type conditions, though, since for some reason they don't let you look things up, let alone pay you, I think I would pick C.
After some prior research projects that are too dull to relate, whenever I see "federal court enjoin state proceeding" or words to that effect, I now immediately think "abstention" and "Anti-Injunction Act," because those typically preclude federal courts from -- and you may have guessed this from the name of the Act -- entering injunctions. C is the only answer in which there is no pending state proceeding to worry about. Since I think the prosecutor's threat is enough to constitute a "case or controversy," the federal court would be able to take subject-matter jurisdiction and might do so. I am guessing that the bad-faith part of the question is to cover a rule or exception I don't specfically remember where a federal court can get involved if something fishy is going on in the state proceeding. So, that's my answer.
If it's correct, please send me four hundred dollars.
Hope the book is selling well.
I think C. When in doubt
I think C.
When in doubt always pick C.
THE ANSWER: Much like the
THE ANSWER:
Much like the real bar exam, you'll have to wait until October to hear the answer/how you did.
Stay tuned.