2026/2027
July Bar Multistate Bar Examination
(MBE) 2026/2027 Exam Prep
Workbook: Mock Tests, Quizzes,
and Study Notes
Question 1
A plaintiff files a state-law negligence action in federal court. The complaint
anticipates that the defendant will argue that a federal safety statute preempts the
plaintiff’s claim. Which conclusion is most accurate under the well-pleaded complaint
rule?
A. Federal-question jurisdiction exists because the anticipated defense involves
federal law.
B. Federal-question jurisdiction exists whenever federal law may become relevant
during litigation.
C. Federal-question jurisdiction does not exist because the plaintiff is not enforcing a
federal right on the face of the complaint.
D. Federal-question jurisdiction exists only if the defendant formally raises the federal
defense in the answer.
Correct Answer: C. Federal-question jurisdiction does not exist because the
plaintiff is not enforcing a federal right on the face of the complaint.
Rationale: Federal-question jurisdiction must be established from the face of the
plaintiff’s properly pleaded complaint. A federal defense, including preemption,
ordinarily does not create federal-question jurisdiction. Options A, B, and D
incorrectly rely on matters that may arise after filing. The central inquiry is whether
the plaintiff’s own cause of action seeks to enforce a right created by federal law.
Question 2
A citizen of State A sues a citizen of State B in federal court for $500,000, asking the
court to issue a divorce decree and determine child custody. Which jurisdictional
ruling is most appropriate?
A. Exercise diversity jurisdiction because complete diversity and the amount
requirement are satisfied.
B. Dismiss because federal diversity jurisdiction does not extend to the issuance of
divorce or child custody orders.
C. Exercise jurisdiction over the divorce but remand the custody dispute.
D. Exercise jurisdiction because the domestic-relations exception applies only when
the parties are citizens of the same state.
,2026/2027
Correct Answer: B. Dismiss because federal diversity jurisdiction does not
extend to the issuance of divorce or child custody orders.
Rationale: The domestic-relations exception narrowly prevents federal courts from
issuing divorce, alimony, and child custody orders, even when ordinary diversity
requirements are met. Option A overlooks this exception. Option C improperly
separates two matters within the exception, and Option D incorrectly links the
exception to the parties’ citizenship rather than the nature of the relief requested.
Question 3
At the time a complaint is filed, the plaintiff is a citizen of State X and the defendant
is a citizen of State Y. Six months later, the plaintiff permanently relocates to State Y.
What is the effect on diversity jurisdiction?
A. Diversity is destroyed immediately because the parties now share citizenship.
B. Diversity remains because citizenship is determined when the complaint is filed.
C. Diversity remains only if the defendant consents.
D. Diversity is destroyed unless the plaintiff moved for reasons unrelated to the
litigation.
Correct Answer: B. Diversity remains because citizenship is determined when
the complaint is filed.
Rationale: Diversity citizenship is assessed as of the filing date. A later change in
domicile does not ordinarily divest the court of subject-matter jurisdiction. Option A
incorrectly applies a continuing-diversity requirement. Options C and D introduce
consent and motive considerations that do not control once complete diversity existed
when the action commenced.
Question 4
A French citizen permanently residing in State M sues a lawful permanent resident
who is domiciled in State M. No United States citizen is a party. Which statement is
most accurate?
A. Alienage jurisdiction exists because the parties are nationals of different countries.
B. Alienage jurisdiction exists because one party is a lawful permanent resident.
C. Alienage jurisdiction is lacking because at least one party must be a citizen of a
United States state.
D. Alienage jurisdiction exists if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
Correct Answer: C. Alienage jurisdiction is lacking because at least one party
must be a citizen of a United States state.
Rationale: Alienage jurisdiction generally requires at least one party to be a citizen of
a United States state. A dispute involving only foreign citizens or foreign nationals
does not satisfy that requirement. An LPR also may not be treated as diverse from an
,2026/2027
opposing party domiciled in the same state. Therefore, Options A, B, and D are
insufficient.
Question 5
A graduate student has lived in State A for two years but repeatedly states that she
intends to return permanently to State B after completing her degree. She retains a
State B driver’s license and voter registration. Where is she most likely domiciled?
A. State A, because physical presence alone establishes domicile.
B. State A, because living there for more than one year creates domicile.
C. State B, because she lacks the intent to remain indefinitely in State A.
D. Both State A and State B, because an individual may have multiple domiciles.
Correct Answer: C. State B, because she lacks the intent to remain indefinitely in
State A.
Rationale: Individual domicile requires both physical presence and an intent to remain
indefinitely. Although the student is physically present in State A, the evidence
indicates that she intends to return to State B. Options A and B improperly treat
presence or duration as dispositive. Option D is incorrect because an individual can
have only one domicile at a time.
Question 6
A corporation is incorporated in Delaware, maintains its headquarters in Illinois, and
operates most of its retail stores in Texas. For diversity purposes, of which states is
the corporation a citizen?
A. Delaware only
B. Texas only
C. Delaware and Illinois
D. Delaware, Illinois, and Texas
Correct Answer: C. Delaware and Illinois
Rationale: A corporation is a citizen of every state in which it is incorporated and the
state containing its principal place of business. The principal place of business is
ordinarily the corporation’s nerve center, usually its headquarters. The location of
most stores or business activity does not independently create corporate citizenship,
making Options B and D incorrect.
Question 7
A limited partnership has ten partners. Nine are citizens of State A, and one limited
partner is a citizen of State B. The partnership sues a citizen of State B in federal court.
Does complete diversity exist?
, 2026/2027
A. Yes, because only general partners determine citizenship.
B. Yes, because the partnership’s principal place of business is in State A.
C. No, because the citizenship of every member, including limited partners, is
considered.
D. No, but only if the limited partner participates in management.
Correct Answer: C. No, because the citizenship of every member, including
limited partners, is considered.
Rationale: An unincorporated association takes the citizenship of each of its members.
For a limited partnership, this includes both general and limited partners. Because one
partner and the defendant are citizens of State B, complete diversity is absent. Options
A, B, and D incorrectly apply corporate principles or exclude limited partners.
Question 8
A State A resident assigns a valuable contract claim to a State B resident solely so the
assignee can sue a State A defendant in federal court. Which result is most likely?
A. Diversity exists because the assignee’s citizenship always controls.
B. Diversity is denied because the assignment was collusively made to manufacture
federal jurisdiction.
C. Diversity exists if the assignee paid at least nominal consideration.
D. Diversity is denied only if the defendant proves the underlying claim is invalid.
Correct Answer: B. Diversity is denied because the assignment was collusively
made to manufacture federal jurisdiction.
Rationale: A legitimate assignment generally allows the assignee’s citizenship to
control. However, a collusive assignment made to create diversity may be disregarded.
Nominal consideration does not necessarily cure a jurisdiction-manufacturing
arrangement. The validity of the underlying claim is separate from whether the
assignment was improperly designed to invoke federal jurisdiction.
Question 9
A plaintiff seeks $70,000 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in attorney’s fees
recoverable under the parties’ contract. The plaintiff files in federal court based on
diversity. Is the amount-in-controversy requirement satisfied?
A. No, because attorney’s fees are never included.
B. No, because only compensatory damages count.
C. Yes, because contractually recoverable attorney’s fees may be included.
D. Yes, but only if the plaintiff has already paid the attorney’s fees.
Correct Answer: C. Yes, because contractually recoverable attorney’s fees may
be included.
July Bar Multistate Bar Examination
(MBE) 2026/2027 Exam Prep
Workbook: Mock Tests, Quizzes,
and Study Notes
Question 1
A plaintiff files a state-law negligence action in federal court. The complaint
anticipates that the defendant will argue that a federal safety statute preempts the
plaintiff’s claim. Which conclusion is most accurate under the well-pleaded complaint
rule?
A. Federal-question jurisdiction exists because the anticipated defense involves
federal law.
B. Federal-question jurisdiction exists whenever federal law may become relevant
during litigation.
C. Federal-question jurisdiction does not exist because the plaintiff is not enforcing a
federal right on the face of the complaint.
D. Federal-question jurisdiction exists only if the defendant formally raises the federal
defense in the answer.
Correct Answer: C. Federal-question jurisdiction does not exist because the
plaintiff is not enforcing a federal right on the face of the complaint.
Rationale: Federal-question jurisdiction must be established from the face of the
plaintiff’s properly pleaded complaint. A federal defense, including preemption,
ordinarily does not create federal-question jurisdiction. Options A, B, and D
incorrectly rely on matters that may arise after filing. The central inquiry is whether
the plaintiff’s own cause of action seeks to enforce a right created by federal law.
Question 2
A citizen of State A sues a citizen of State B in federal court for $500,000, asking the
court to issue a divorce decree and determine child custody. Which jurisdictional
ruling is most appropriate?
A. Exercise diversity jurisdiction because complete diversity and the amount
requirement are satisfied.
B. Dismiss because federal diversity jurisdiction does not extend to the issuance of
divorce or child custody orders.
C. Exercise jurisdiction over the divorce but remand the custody dispute.
D. Exercise jurisdiction because the domestic-relations exception applies only when
the parties are citizens of the same state.
,2026/2027
Correct Answer: B. Dismiss because federal diversity jurisdiction does not
extend to the issuance of divorce or child custody orders.
Rationale: The domestic-relations exception narrowly prevents federal courts from
issuing divorce, alimony, and child custody orders, even when ordinary diversity
requirements are met. Option A overlooks this exception. Option C improperly
separates two matters within the exception, and Option D incorrectly links the
exception to the parties’ citizenship rather than the nature of the relief requested.
Question 3
At the time a complaint is filed, the plaintiff is a citizen of State X and the defendant
is a citizen of State Y. Six months later, the plaintiff permanently relocates to State Y.
What is the effect on diversity jurisdiction?
A. Diversity is destroyed immediately because the parties now share citizenship.
B. Diversity remains because citizenship is determined when the complaint is filed.
C. Diversity remains only if the defendant consents.
D. Diversity is destroyed unless the plaintiff moved for reasons unrelated to the
litigation.
Correct Answer: B. Diversity remains because citizenship is determined when
the complaint is filed.
Rationale: Diversity citizenship is assessed as of the filing date. A later change in
domicile does not ordinarily divest the court of subject-matter jurisdiction. Option A
incorrectly applies a continuing-diversity requirement. Options C and D introduce
consent and motive considerations that do not control once complete diversity existed
when the action commenced.
Question 4
A French citizen permanently residing in State M sues a lawful permanent resident
who is domiciled in State M. No United States citizen is a party. Which statement is
most accurate?
A. Alienage jurisdiction exists because the parties are nationals of different countries.
B. Alienage jurisdiction exists because one party is a lawful permanent resident.
C. Alienage jurisdiction is lacking because at least one party must be a citizen of a
United States state.
D. Alienage jurisdiction exists if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
Correct Answer: C. Alienage jurisdiction is lacking because at least one party
must be a citizen of a United States state.
Rationale: Alienage jurisdiction generally requires at least one party to be a citizen of
a United States state. A dispute involving only foreign citizens or foreign nationals
does not satisfy that requirement. An LPR also may not be treated as diverse from an
,2026/2027
opposing party domiciled in the same state. Therefore, Options A, B, and D are
insufficient.
Question 5
A graduate student has lived in State A for two years but repeatedly states that she
intends to return permanently to State B after completing her degree. She retains a
State B driver’s license and voter registration. Where is she most likely domiciled?
A. State A, because physical presence alone establishes domicile.
B. State A, because living there for more than one year creates domicile.
C. State B, because she lacks the intent to remain indefinitely in State A.
D. Both State A and State B, because an individual may have multiple domiciles.
Correct Answer: C. State B, because she lacks the intent to remain indefinitely in
State A.
Rationale: Individual domicile requires both physical presence and an intent to remain
indefinitely. Although the student is physically present in State A, the evidence
indicates that she intends to return to State B. Options A and B improperly treat
presence or duration as dispositive. Option D is incorrect because an individual can
have only one domicile at a time.
Question 6
A corporation is incorporated in Delaware, maintains its headquarters in Illinois, and
operates most of its retail stores in Texas. For diversity purposes, of which states is
the corporation a citizen?
A. Delaware only
B. Texas only
C. Delaware and Illinois
D. Delaware, Illinois, and Texas
Correct Answer: C. Delaware and Illinois
Rationale: A corporation is a citizen of every state in which it is incorporated and the
state containing its principal place of business. The principal place of business is
ordinarily the corporation’s nerve center, usually its headquarters. The location of
most stores or business activity does not independently create corporate citizenship,
making Options B and D incorrect.
Question 7
A limited partnership has ten partners. Nine are citizens of State A, and one limited
partner is a citizen of State B. The partnership sues a citizen of State B in federal court.
Does complete diversity exist?
, 2026/2027
A. Yes, because only general partners determine citizenship.
B. Yes, because the partnership’s principal place of business is in State A.
C. No, because the citizenship of every member, including limited partners, is
considered.
D. No, but only if the limited partner participates in management.
Correct Answer: C. No, because the citizenship of every member, including
limited partners, is considered.
Rationale: An unincorporated association takes the citizenship of each of its members.
For a limited partnership, this includes both general and limited partners. Because one
partner and the defendant are citizens of State B, complete diversity is absent. Options
A, B, and D incorrectly apply corporate principles or exclude limited partners.
Question 8
A State A resident assigns a valuable contract claim to a State B resident solely so the
assignee can sue a State A defendant in federal court. Which result is most likely?
A. Diversity exists because the assignee’s citizenship always controls.
B. Diversity is denied because the assignment was collusively made to manufacture
federal jurisdiction.
C. Diversity exists if the assignee paid at least nominal consideration.
D. Diversity is denied only if the defendant proves the underlying claim is invalid.
Correct Answer: B. Diversity is denied because the assignment was collusively
made to manufacture federal jurisdiction.
Rationale: A legitimate assignment generally allows the assignee’s citizenship to
control. However, a collusive assignment made to create diversity may be disregarded.
Nominal consideration does not necessarily cure a jurisdiction-manufacturing
arrangement. The validity of the underlying claim is separate from whether the
assignment was improperly designed to invoke federal jurisdiction.
Question 9
A plaintiff seeks $70,000 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in attorney’s fees
recoverable under the parties’ contract. The plaintiff files in federal court based on
diversity. Is the amount-in-controversy requirement satisfied?
A. No, because attorney’s fees are never included.
B. No, because only compensatory damages count.
C. Yes, because contractually recoverable attorney’s fees may be included.
D. Yes, but only if the plaintiff has already paid the attorney’s fees.
Correct Answer: C. Yes, because contractually recoverable attorney’s fees may
be included.
