1. You have three (3) hours to complete this exam.

2. This exam is closed book; no materials are allowed.

3. There are two parts to this exam. Part I is to be answered on a ParScore form. Part II is to be answered in blue books (or typed). If you answer Part II in a blue book, please write on every other line.

Part I: Consists of 35 multiple choice questions. Each question is worth 2 points: 70 possible points total. Correct multiple choice answers are to be marked on the separate “ParSCORE TEST FORM” using pen or pencil and following the instructions on that form. If you change your answer, place a clear X through the wrong answer and mark the correct answer. A machine will score the exam and any ambiguities will be counted as a wrong answer.


Special instructions for Part I:
You are to answer all questions according to the Federal Rules of Evidence unless the question indicates otherwise or unless a question of evidentiary privilege is raised in which latter case, you should apply the California Evidence Code, unless the question indicates otherwise.

Part II: Consists of one essay question, which is worth 35 points. Please write your responses in the blue books provided to you. Write only on the right hand side of the page and double-space your work, written or typed. Please write legibly.

Special Instructions for Part II:
You are to base your answers on the Federal Rules. However, in those areas where there are significant differences in the Federal Rules and the California Code, you should contrast how each would apply. In the area of privilege, you should base your answers on the California Code but again you should note any material differences between California and Federal law.

Deal with all issues raised even though you believe disposition of one is controlling.

5. Write your exam number on this exam envelope, all used blue books, at the top of this exam packet, and on the ParScore answer sheet. Do not use your name, student ID number, or Social Security Number on any exam materials.

6. At the conclusion of the exam, return all test materials, including blue books, ParScore answer sheet, scratch paper, and this exam packet to the envelope and submit it to the proctor. DO NOT seal the envelope. Students who do not return all exam materials at the end of the exam will not be graded.

PART II – ESSAY

Peter Plaintiff sues Dan Defendant for negligently setting a fire that burned Plaintiff’s house down. Plaintiff’s allegation is that Defendant was burning leaves in his backyard; that he started the fire with kerosene; and that he did this despite the fact that he knew the wind was blowing very heavily that day. Defendant denies both the use of kerosene and the high winds. He claims he had a small fire going in his backyard, that a very small gust of wind arose and that the real cause of the damage to Plaintiff’s house were several old dead trees in Plaintiff’s backyard that hung over the fence into Defendant’s yard (which Defendant had asked Plaintiff to trim many times). Plaintiff and Defendant both testified to their version of the facts. In addition, Plaintiff called Nell Neighbor, a neighbor who lives across the street from Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s homes. She testified that on the day of the fire, Defendant had a huge fire burning and that the wind was blowing extremely hard, even before he set the fire. In addition, the following evidence was admitted at trial. Assume all appropriate objections were made. Discuss whether the following evidence was properly admitted. Set forth your reasons.

On cross-examination of the Defendant, Plaintiff’s Counsel showed Defendant a copy of the San Francisco Chronicle from the day of the fire. Plaintiff’s Counsel asked Defendant, “Showing you this copy of the Chronicle from the day of the fire, I ask you whether before you even set the fire, you read this headline story entitled, “Extremely High Winds Expected Today”? Defendant answered, “Yes.”

On cross-examination of Nell Neighbor, Defense counsel asked her whether she had gotten engaged to marry Plaintiff six months earlier and whether it was true that she had been convicted of felony tax evasion three years earlier. Neighbor answered yes to both questions.

On redirect of Nell Neighbor, Plaintiff’s counsel asked her if she had ever told anyone else about her version of the events. She said that she had sent a letter to her brother the day of the fire which was almost two years ago. The letter (which she identified) was then introduced into evidence. It described the fire and the wind as she had testified to it earlier.

Plaintiff also called Phil Physician who testified that on the day of the fire Defendant’s brother carried Defendant into Physician’s office because Defendant was badly burned. As the brother helped Defendant to lie down on an examining table, Physician asked Defendant what happened. Defendant said “Some kerosene blew up in my face.”

END OF EXAM