Question Details

1.	A Shell Corporation: part 1

A. Has assets and liabilities.
B. Has no Charter to operate.
C. Cannot be interlocked.
D. Can be pyramided.
E. Is a ready-made, already existing Corporation.


2. An accountant who conducts an audit of an issuer of securities to which Section 10A(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, (15 U.S.C. 78j-1(a)), applies, shall maintain all audit or review work papers for A period of:

A. Five years from the beginning of the fiscal period in which the audit or review was concluded.
B. Five years from the end of the fiscal period in which the audit or review was concluded.
C. No more than four years from the beginning of the fiscal period in which the audit or review was concluded.
D. At least six years.
E. None of the above.


3. Breach of contract action by P against D. P claims D failed to deliver the goods called for in the contract. D asserts the doctrine of impossibility, based on the claim that severe storms caused flooding which destroyed all the goods in D- warehouse. To prove impossibility, D offers in evidence what appears to be a newspaper published in the town in which D- business is located, and which is dated a few days before D was supposed to ship P- order. An article in the paper reports the loss of all the goods in D- warehouse due to storm-related flooding. P objects on grounds of lack of authentication.
How should the court rule?

A. The court should overrule the objection
B. The court should sustain the objection because the newspaper is not the best evidence of whether flooding caused the destruction of the goods in D- warehouse.
C. The court should sustain the objection if it finds that there is insufficient evidence to support a finding that this is the newspaper D claims it to be.
D. The court should sustain the objection if it finds that D has failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that this is the newspaper D claims it to be.
E. None of the above.

4. Sam, a house painter, was charged with stealing three valuable figurines from the home of Johnson while painting the interior of that home. At Sam- trial, Johnson testified that he first noticed that the figurines were missing about an hour after Sam left his home. He stated that he looked Sam- number up in the telephone book and properly dialed the number listed therein. Over objection by Sam- attorney, Johnson stated that a man answered the phone by saying, “Sam speaking.” Johnson stated that he then said, “Sam, where are the figurines?” and that the person at the other end of the line said, “ I’m sorry. I took them.”
The objection by Sam- attorney should be:

A. Overruled
B. Sustained, since Johnson did not actually see the person to whom he was speaking.
C. Sustained since the statement is hearsay.
D Sustained, unless independent evidence establishes that Sam was the person to whom Johnson was speaking.
E. None of the above

5. Breach of contract action by P against D. P claims the contract, which was reduced to writing, called for D to deliver 200 crates of apples by a certain date. At trial, D wishes to testify that the contract only called for delivery of 100 crates. P makes a best evidence rule objection
How should the Court rule?

A. None of the answers below
B. The court should overrule the objection because a contract is an agreement brought about by the meeting of two minds, not a writing. The writing is only a memorandum of the agreement, not the contract itself.
C. The court should overrule the objection because D is not testifying about the contents of the writing, but about her understanding of the agreement. Thus the best evidence rule does not apply.
D. The court should overrule the objection because the central issue in the case concerns the terms of the agreement, and the jury is entitled to hear D- interpretation of the terms.
E. The court should sustain the objection

6. At the trial of an automobile accident case, for the purpose of showing the relationship and directions of the streets involved, the plaintiff offered into evidence a photograph of the intersection where the accident occurred. The plaintiff testified that on the day of the accident the intersection looked exactly as depicted in the photograph, except that on the day of accident some of the trees on the street had small Christmas ornaments on them.
Upon objection, should the photograph be admitted in evidence?

A. None of the answers below
B. Yes, but only if the photograph was taken within a reasonable time following the accident.
C. No, unless the photographer who made the photograph testifies to its authenticity.
D. Yes, if the absence of the Christmas tree ornaments did not prevent the photograph from being a fair representation of the intersection at the time of the accident
E. No, not under any circumstances

7. Powell was sitting in his car at a dead stop waiting for a traffic light to change color, when his vehicle was struck in the rear by a car operated by David, rendering Powell unconscious. Police were called to the accident scene and as a result of their investigation David was charged with “operating an unregistered vehicle,” a misdemeanor. The following day, David pleaded guilty to the charge and was sentenced to five days in jail.
Powell subsequently asserted a claim for damages resulting from David- negligence. Because of admissions which were made in the pleadings, a hearing was held on the sole questions of whether David was negligent.
At the hearing, a transcript of David- conviction for operating an unregistered vehicle should be:

A. Admitted
B. Excluded, because it is not relevant to the question of negligence.
C. Excluded, because it was not the result of a trial.
D. Excluded, because it is hearsay, not within any exception.
E. None of the above
Question #8 is based on the following fact situation:
After the crash of Watson- Airlines Flight 123, an action for wrongful death was brought by the husband of a passenger killed in the crash. During the trial, the plaintiff called William, an employee of the State Aviation Agency which investigated the circumstances surrounding the crash.

8. William also read aloud from an investigation report which quoted an unidentified witness to the crash as stating that she heard an explosion several sounds before she saw the plane burst into flames. He testified that the report from which he was reading was one kept in the regular course of business by the State Aviation Agency, that the entry was sworn to investigate airplane crashes and to keep honest and accurate records of the results of those investigations, and that the investigator who made the entry was now dead. Upon appropriate objection, the evidence should be ruled

A. Admissible as a business record.
B. Admissible as an official written statement.
C. Admissible as past recollection recorded.
D. Admissible as hearsay within the witness-not-available exception
E. None of the above

9. Dennis and Peter were motorists. As Peter was driving to work one day, his car was struck by a vehicle driven by Dennis. Peter immediately got out of his car and, after getting Dennis- driver- license and other data, began asking people in the
area if they had seen what had occurred. Although somewhat reluctant to get “involved” Mary told Peter that she had seen the accident, and that Dennis- vehicle was over the center line when the crash occurred. Three days later, an adjuster employed by Peter- insurer also asked Mary what had occurred and received the same response. Peter sued Dennis (who claimed that Peter- vehicle was over the center line). At trial, when Peter- attorney attempts to have the insurance adjuster testify as to what Mary had said to him, Dennis- attorney objects.

It is most likely that the testimony will be:

A. Admissible because it is an admission
B. Admissible because Mary- statement was an excited utterance
C. Inadmissible because there is no indication that Mary is unavailable
D. Inadmissible because Mary- statement is hearsay
E. None of the above


10. Dean was charged with violating a federal law which prohibits the unlicensed transportation of specified toxic wastes across a state line. At his trial in federal district court, the prosecution proved that Dean had transported certain toxic wastes from Detroit, Michigan to Chicago, Illinois. The prosecuting attorney then moved that the court take judicial notice that it is impossible to travel between those two cities without crossing a state line.
Upon proper objection by Dean- attorney, the prosecution- motion should be:

A. None of the answers below
B. Granted, but only if the prosecution presents the court with a reputable map or other reference work indicating that a state line lies between the cities of Detroit and Chicago.
C. Denied, but only if Dean- attorney demands an offer of proof for the record.
D. Denied, if the fact that Dean traveled across a state line concerns an ultimate issue of fact.
E. Granted, if it is generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the court that it is impossible to travel from Detroit to Chicago without crossing a state line


11. Dario was on trial for attempting to extort money from Oscar. Oscar owned a large hardware store in Albany. The prosecution introduced into evidence Dario- telephone registry, which showed a call to a particular phone number on the day a demand for $50,000 was telephonically made to Oscar. The prosecution sought to introduce into evidence a properly authenticated copy of the Albany telephone book. This book contained a listing for Oscar- store at that number.
The evidence is:

A. Inadmissible because it is hearsay
B. Inadmissible because it is entirely possible that Dario called Oscar- store for a business purpose
C. Inadmissible because of the Best Evidence Rule
D. Admissible because it relevant to show that Dario might have been the extortionist
E. None of the above

12. Two police officers in a squad car received a radio message from headquarters to be on the lookout for a large green sedan occupied by two women who had just committed a bank robbery. An hour later, they saw a car answering this description traveling down a main boulevard leading out of town. They pulled the car over to the side of the road and walked over to it. One of the officers told the occupants that they were under arrest for bank robbery. Doreen, the driver, suddenly put the car into gear and drove off. The Officers, unable to overtake the car and afraid they would lose sight of it in heavy traffic, shot at the car. A bullet struck Valerie, the passenger sitting next to Doreen. Doreen was caught five minutes later. Valerie died from loss of blood. Doreen was taken to the police station.

The bank robbers had handed the teller a handwritten note, demanding the money. Doreen was required, over her protest, to write out the words of the note and have her fingerprints taken. She was then, for the first time, allowed to telephone a lawyer, who thereafter represented her. Doreen was charged with the bank robbery and the murder of Valerie. At trial, the prosecution, after introducing the robbers’ note to the teller, also offered into evidence Doreen- exemplar of the words of the note written at the demand of the police.
On appropriate objection, the court should rule that this evidence is:

A. None of the answers below
B. Admissible, if Doreen was told beforehand she had the right to refuse based on the privilege against self-incrimination
C. Admissible.
D. Inadmissible, if Doreen was not advised that her handwriting sample could be admitted into evidence against her
E. Inadmissible, because Doreen was entitled to refuse to give a handwriting sample.
F. Inadmissible, if Doreen had not been informed that she had a right to have counsel present.


13. Maryanne is a 72-year old retired junior high school teacher. She commenced an action against Martin, a licensed stockbroker, claiming that he had deceived her into investing her life savings by fraudulently claiming that he would greatly enrich her via a series of stock transactions. Martin has no history of disciplinary actions or lawsuits against him with respect to stock transactions initiated by him. Martin is generally known as an honest person by his friends, colleagues, and clients.
At trial, Martin- counsel attempts to introduce evidence, via the testimony of another stockbroker who works with Martin, that Martin “has an excellent reputation for honesty in the business community.”
If Maryanne- attorney objects to the introduction of this evidence, it is most likely that:

A. The objection will be overruled because character evidence is admissible in civil cases
B. The objection will be overruled because Martin- character is directly in issue in this case
C. The objection will be sustained because the testimony is hearsay
D. The objection will be sustained because evidence of Martin- character is not admissible
E. None of the above.


14. Prosecution of Dr. Iaconis for arson. To prove the fire was set intentionally, the prosecution calls Jay Leiner, a police arson investigator who has served in that capacity for ten years after spending several years as a beat officer. Jay Leiner never attended college and had no special schooling in arson investigation, but learned investigative techniques from a senior investigator with whom he worked for two years. From techniques learned through this experience, Leiner spoke with eyewitnesses who saw the fire at various stages, and concluded from that information as well as his own investigation of the fire scene that the fire was set intentionally.
Which of the following objections to Leiner- testimony is the court likely to sustain, if either?

A. Leiner is not a qualified expert
B. Leiner- testimony about the cause of the fire should be excluded as inadmissible hearsay.
C. The court is likely to sustain both of these objections.
D. The court is likely to rule that it does not matter anyway because Dr. Iaconis is a known arsonist.
E. None of the above


15. The bus in which Pete was riding was struck from the rear by a taxicab. Pete sued Taxi Company for a claimed neck injury. Taxi Company claimed the impact was too slight to have caused the claimed injury and introduced testimony that all passengers had refused medical attention at the time of the accident.
Pete called a doctor from County Hospital to testify that three persons were admitted to the Hospital for treatment within a week after the accident complaining about severe neck pains.
The trial judge should rule the doctor- testimony:

A. Admissible because a doctor is properly qualified as an expert in medical matters
B. Admissible if other testimony establishes a causal connection between the other passengers’ pain and the accident
C. Inadmissible because the testimony as to the neck pain complained about by the other three passengers is hearsay, not within any exception
D. Inadmissible because the testimony cannot be introduced without also introducing the medical records that contain reports of the other passengers’ pain


16. Marge sued Medco, which makes breast implants. She claims that she contracted an unusual disease from a breast implant produced by Medco, which she received several years earlier. At the trial, Medco attempted to introduce a transcript recording the testimony of Dr. Peters, a recognized expert, which was given in a previous lawsuit against Medco by Jane. Jane is another Medco breast implant recipient, who had contracted a disease similar to that of Marge. Dr. Peters, who has long since died, had testified at that trial (in which Medco prevailed) that Medco- breast implants did not cause the disease contracted by Jane.
If Marge- attorney objects to the introduction of Dr. Peters’ authenticated transcript, it is most likely that:

A. The objection will be sustained because Dr. Peters’ transcript is hearsay
B. The objection will be overruled because Jane- counsel had opportunity and similar motive to cross-examine Dr. Peters
C. The objection will be overruled because Dr. Peters’ transcript was properly authenticated
D. The objection will be overruled, if Dr. Peters was an expert with respect to matters about which he testified

17. In a contract case, the plaintiff offered a purportedly signed original of the contract, bearing the defendant- signature.
The trial judge can admit it:

A. Subject to the introduction of evidence that would support a finding of the genuineness of the signature
B. Only if, in the trial judge- opinion, the contested signature bears a reasonable resemblance to that of the defendant
C. Only if the trial judge finds that the genuineness of the defendant- signature is established as a matter of law
D. Only if the plaintiff persuades the court that it is more likely than not that the signature is genuine
E. None of the above

18. In order for financial institutions to be able to legally share customer information with each other, which of the following steps must they take?

A. File a prescribed notice form with Fin CEN stating that it intends to share customer information with other financial institutions
B. Notify the account holder that his account information will be shared with another financial institution
C. The institution must ensure that the shared information is secure and not used for any purpose other than to identify and, where appropriate, report on money laundering or terrorist activities
D. A and C
E.None of the above

19. The same customer comes into a bank each day and purchases $8,000 worth of travelers’ checks. The bank employees suspect that the customer may be engaged in money laundering activity.
The bank:

A. Cannot report these activities since each transaction is less than $10,000
B. May, but is not required to, file a Suspicious Activity Report
C. Is required to file a Currency Transaction Report since there were multiple accounts
D. Is required to file a Suspicious Activity Report
E.None of the above

20. Which of the following is a step in the money laundering process?

A. Integration
B. Deception
C. Layering
D. A and C
E.None of the above