FINAL EXAMINATION
EVIDENCE – EVENING SECTION
Professor Peter Keane
FALL 2006
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. You have three (3) hours to complete
this examination.
2. This is a closed book exam. No outside materials are
allowed.
3. The
exam consists of one section of 20 Multiple Choice Questions and a section of 2
essay questions. The 20 Multiple Choice Questions are worth 1/3 of the total
grade. Each of the 2 essay questions is worth 1/3 of the total grade. So you
should budget your time to devote one hour and not more to each question.
4.
Write your exam
number on your exam envelope. Put your
correct class section and student exam # at the top of this page, each page of
questions, each blue book, and the “ParSCORE TEST FORM.” Do not use
your name, student ID number or Social Security Number on any exam materials.
5.
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 may not have
their exams graded.
Part Two – Essay
(One Hour)
Amy, a licensed real estate broker, sues Martha for
breach of contract. Amy claims that Martha entered into an exclusive contact
for Amy to sell her house and then Martha sold it herself. Amy is suing for the
10% commission on the purchase price called for under the contract.
Martha’s defense is that after Amy had been unsuccessful
in finding a buyer for almost a year, they both agreed to rescind the contract.
Amy offers this evidence:
1.
A document titled
“California Department of Real Estate” which says “Amy Johnson, Licensed
California Realtor.”
2.
Testimony of
Martha’s neighbor that on September 1, which other evidence shows to be the
date Martha first showed the house to the buyer, the neighbor’s husband was
looking out the window and said, “I wonder why Martha just ran out and took
down the ‘Amy’s Real Estate For Sale’ sign just before that guy drove up and
went into the house?”
3.
Amy’s
receptionist brings a book titled “Amy’s Real Estate Telephone Logs” to court.
The book contains this entry for September 1, “Martha returned your call. She
said it was OK to bring people to see the house this weekend.”
4.
Testimony of
George, one of Amy’s salesmen: George is asked if he showed Martha’s house to
potential buyers on September 1. He says he can’t remember. He is shown a memo
that he identifies as one he wrote for his activities on that weekend. The memo
says, “Showed 3 buyers Martha’s house.” The memo is put into evidence.
Martha’s Defense evidence is:
A.
Sam, a former
salesman at Amy’s Real Estate testifies that 2 weeks before September 1 he
heard Albert, now deceased, who was the Chief of Sales for Amy, talking on the
phone. Sam testifies that Albert said, “OK Martha, if you want out of the
exclusive contract, consider it done. It has been a long time and we just can’t
seem to find you a buyer.”
B.
Albert’s wife
testifies that Albert called her a few weeks before September 1. He said,
“Terrible news. Amy says business is so bad we are going to close down. We will
be canceling all our contracts. How are we going to pay our kids tuition with
me out of work?”
In
rebuttal to this, Amy presents:
(i)
Testimony of
Albert’s bartender that Albert got drunk in his bar a few days before he died.
The bartender testified that Albert said, “I am doing all I can to ruin Amy’s
business so I can start my own company and get all of her accounts.”
(ii)
Testimony of
Amy’s banker that, just around the same time Albert told his wife that Amy was
going out of business, Amy came into the bank, paid off all of the Real Estate
Company’s outstanding loans, made a large additional deposit in the Company’s
account and told him, “Business is booming. I am getting rich”
Discuss all issues raised
by these facts. State how these issues should be resolved and why.
Arnold, pastor of a church, along with Betty and Jack, a
married couple who are church members, are all charged with numerous counts of
theft, fraud and conspiracy. The prosecution contends that the defendants stole
homes and other property from elderly church members.
The prosecution evidence is:
1.
Testimony of
Walter who is 93 years old and suffers from Alzheimer’s disease who says. “That
signature on the deed transferring my house to Pastor Arnold ain’t mine. It’s a
fake.”
On
cross-examination of Walter he is asked, “When did you see the deed?” Walter
replies, “What is a deed?”
2.
A letter from
Betty to Jack stating, “I just hope our kids never find out we are stealing.
They would lose all respect for us.”
3.
Testimony of the
church janitor that one night he was cleaning outside Pastor Arnold’s office
and heard a man and a woman talking with
4.
Testimony of a
neighbor of a deceased elderly woman who had signed over her home to the
defendants in 2005. The neighbor says, “That lady was totally senile since the
mid 1990’s.”
On
cross-examination the neighbor is asked, “Isn’t it true that your daughter
dates that lady’s grandson?” he answers, “No.” He is then asked, “Did you ever
tell anyone that your daughter and the grandson date?” he answers, “No.”
Later
in the defense case, they call the neighbor’s lawyer as a witness. The lawyer
testifies, “He told me his daughter dates the lady’s grandson.”
The Defense offers this evidence:
A.
Pastor Arnold
testifies and says he is not guilty.
On
cross-examination the prosecutor asks
On
rebuttal, the prosecution later presents a witness who testifies that
B.
Betty calls her
employer who testifies, “Betty is the most honest person I know.”
On
cross-examination the prosecution asks the employer, “Have you heard Betty is a
shoplifter?” The employer says, “No.” The prosecution later puts in evidence a
2-year-old misdemeanor conviction of Betty for theft at a cosmetics store.
Discuss all issues raised
by these facts. State how these issues should be resolved and why.