BARBRI MBE ADVANCED PREP PACK 2026
FULL QUESTIONS AND CORRECT
ANSWERS
◉At trial in an action for personal injuries suffered in a traffic
accident, the plaintiff first calls the defendant as an adverse party.
The plaintiff then calls a witness who was a passenger in the
plaintiff's car but who also happens to be the defendant's former
employer. On direct examination, the witness testifies to how the
accident occurred and also expresses his opinion that the defendant
is not a truthful person.
Which one of the following areas of questioning is most likely to be
held beyond the proper scope of cross-examination?
Press Enter or Space to submit the answerAIn letters to prospective
employers, the witness has described the defendant as very honest
and dependable.BThe defendant recently filed an action against the
witness for breach of contract.CThe plaintiff's injuries were not as
serious as the plaintiff is claiming.DThe witness has been falsifying
his income tax returns.. Answer: (C) is correct. The scope of cross-
examination is generally limited to: (i) matters brought up on direct
examination; and (ii) matters concerning the witness's credibility
(i.e., impeachment). Here, the witness's testimony on direct
examination concerned how the accident happened and the
defendant's character for untruthfulness; there is no indication that
,the witness testified about the plaintiff's injuries. Because the
questioning does not concern the subject matter of the direct
examination or the witness's credibility, it is most likely to be held
beyond the proper scope of cross-examination. The other answer
choices describe proper impeachment of the witness. (A) is
incorrect. A common method of impeachment is asking the witness
about the witness's prior statements that are inconsistent with the
witness's current testimony. Here the witness testified as to his
opinion that the defendant is an untruthful person. Thus, it would be
proper to cross-examine the witness about his inconsistent prior
descriptions of the defendant's good character for honesty. (B) is
incorrect. A witness may be impeached with evidence that the
witness is biased in favor of or against a party in the case. Here, the
fact that the defendant recently filed an action against the witness
for breach of contract shows that the witness may have a motive to
testify against the defendant in this case. (D) is incorrect. A party
may impeach a witness by cross-examining the witness about the
witness's specific acts of misconduct involving untruthfulness. Thus,
it is proper to ask the witness about whether the witness falsified
his tax returns.
◉In an effort to counteract a steep increase in juvenile crime, a state
enacted a law terminating the parental rights of any state resident
whose child under 16 years of age is convicted of a violent crime in
the state. The law directs the state juvenile court to enter a
termination order in such a case after the parent has been afforded
notice and an opportunity for a hearing at which the only relevant
issues are the age of the child and whether the child has been
convicted of a violent crime in the state.
,Is the state law constitutional?
Press Enter or Space to submit the answerANo, because the law is
not narrowly tailored to serve a substantial state interest.BNo,
because the law is not necessary to serve a compelling state
interest.CYes, because a state's police power authorizes it to punish
criminal behavior with appropriate sanctions.DYes, because the law
is rationally related to a legitimate state interest.. Answer: (B) is
correct. Under the Due Process Clause, if government action impacts
a fundamental right, the action is valid only if it passes strict scrutiny
- that is, the government must prove that the action is necessary to
achieve a compelling state interest. This is a very difficult hurdle to
clear. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution includes
a fundamental right of privacy, and the fundamental right of privacy
includes the right of parents to the companionship, care, custody,
and control of their children. This fundamental right surely extends
to instances where, as here, the state seeks to terminate
companionship/parental rights. Thus, the only choice that reflects
the strict scrutiny standard is (B). While whether the standard was
met is a factual determination, as indicated above, the standard is
very hard to meet. Surely, there are ways to curtail juvenile crime
other than automatically terminating parental rights on proof that
the parent's child committed a violent crime. For example, perhaps
parenting classes would be equally or more effective. (A) is
incorrect. Although it comes to the correct result (that is, the law is
unconstitutional), it sets forth an intermediate scrutiny test, which is
not used in substantive due process analysis. (C) is incorrect.
Although it is true that states have the power to punish criminal
behavior, their punishments and procedures must not violate any
constitutional provision or federal law. As discussed above, the
, automatic termination of parental rights here violates the Due
Process Clause. (D) is incorrect. Although it probably is true that the
law here is rationally related to reducing juvenile crime (which is a
legitimate government interest), as indicated above, the rational
basis test does not apply when a fundamental right is impacted by
the government acti
◉A mechanic sued his former employer in federal court, claiming
that the employer had discharged him because of his age in violation
of federal law. The employer answered, denying the claims and
promptly moving for summary judgment. In support of the motion,
the employer attached the mechanic's employment evaluations for
the past three years, which rated his skills and performance as poor
and culminated in a recommendation for his discharge.
What is the mechanic's best argument to defeat the summary
judgment motion?
Press Enter or Space to submit the answerAThe allegations in the
complaint conflict with the mechanic's employment evaluations,
raising a genuine dispute as to material facts.BThe employer cannot
rely in his motion on matters outside the pleadings.CThe essential
facts are unavailable to the mechanic and therefore discovery is
required.DThe motion was filed before the close of discovery..
Answer: (C) is correct. If the mechanic (the nonmovant) shows by
affidavit or declaration that he cannot present facts essential to
justify his opposition to the summary judgment motion, Rule 56(d)
authorizes him to ask the court to defer action or deny the motion to
allow time to obtain affidavits or declarations or to take discovery.
The employer moved for summary judgment right after answering
FULL QUESTIONS AND CORRECT
ANSWERS
◉At trial in an action for personal injuries suffered in a traffic
accident, the plaintiff first calls the defendant as an adverse party.
The plaintiff then calls a witness who was a passenger in the
plaintiff's car but who also happens to be the defendant's former
employer. On direct examination, the witness testifies to how the
accident occurred and also expresses his opinion that the defendant
is not a truthful person.
Which one of the following areas of questioning is most likely to be
held beyond the proper scope of cross-examination?
Press Enter or Space to submit the answerAIn letters to prospective
employers, the witness has described the defendant as very honest
and dependable.BThe defendant recently filed an action against the
witness for breach of contract.CThe plaintiff's injuries were not as
serious as the plaintiff is claiming.DThe witness has been falsifying
his income tax returns.. Answer: (C) is correct. The scope of cross-
examination is generally limited to: (i) matters brought up on direct
examination; and (ii) matters concerning the witness's credibility
(i.e., impeachment). Here, the witness's testimony on direct
examination concerned how the accident happened and the
defendant's character for untruthfulness; there is no indication that
,the witness testified about the plaintiff's injuries. Because the
questioning does not concern the subject matter of the direct
examination or the witness's credibility, it is most likely to be held
beyond the proper scope of cross-examination. The other answer
choices describe proper impeachment of the witness. (A) is
incorrect. A common method of impeachment is asking the witness
about the witness's prior statements that are inconsistent with the
witness's current testimony. Here the witness testified as to his
opinion that the defendant is an untruthful person. Thus, it would be
proper to cross-examine the witness about his inconsistent prior
descriptions of the defendant's good character for honesty. (B) is
incorrect. A witness may be impeached with evidence that the
witness is biased in favor of or against a party in the case. Here, the
fact that the defendant recently filed an action against the witness
for breach of contract shows that the witness may have a motive to
testify against the defendant in this case. (D) is incorrect. A party
may impeach a witness by cross-examining the witness about the
witness's specific acts of misconduct involving untruthfulness. Thus,
it is proper to ask the witness about whether the witness falsified
his tax returns.
◉In an effort to counteract a steep increase in juvenile crime, a state
enacted a law terminating the parental rights of any state resident
whose child under 16 years of age is convicted of a violent crime in
the state. The law directs the state juvenile court to enter a
termination order in such a case after the parent has been afforded
notice and an opportunity for a hearing at which the only relevant
issues are the age of the child and whether the child has been
convicted of a violent crime in the state.
,Is the state law constitutional?
Press Enter or Space to submit the answerANo, because the law is
not narrowly tailored to serve a substantial state interest.BNo,
because the law is not necessary to serve a compelling state
interest.CYes, because a state's police power authorizes it to punish
criminal behavior with appropriate sanctions.DYes, because the law
is rationally related to a legitimate state interest.. Answer: (B) is
correct. Under the Due Process Clause, if government action impacts
a fundamental right, the action is valid only if it passes strict scrutiny
- that is, the government must prove that the action is necessary to
achieve a compelling state interest. This is a very difficult hurdle to
clear. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution includes
a fundamental right of privacy, and the fundamental right of privacy
includes the right of parents to the companionship, care, custody,
and control of their children. This fundamental right surely extends
to instances where, as here, the state seeks to terminate
companionship/parental rights. Thus, the only choice that reflects
the strict scrutiny standard is (B). While whether the standard was
met is a factual determination, as indicated above, the standard is
very hard to meet. Surely, there are ways to curtail juvenile crime
other than automatically terminating parental rights on proof that
the parent's child committed a violent crime. For example, perhaps
parenting classes would be equally or more effective. (A) is
incorrect. Although it comes to the correct result (that is, the law is
unconstitutional), it sets forth an intermediate scrutiny test, which is
not used in substantive due process analysis. (C) is incorrect.
Although it is true that states have the power to punish criminal
behavior, their punishments and procedures must not violate any
constitutional provision or federal law. As discussed above, the
, automatic termination of parental rights here violates the Due
Process Clause. (D) is incorrect. Although it probably is true that the
law here is rationally related to reducing juvenile crime (which is a
legitimate government interest), as indicated above, the rational
basis test does not apply when a fundamental right is impacted by
the government acti
◉A mechanic sued his former employer in federal court, claiming
that the employer had discharged him because of his age in violation
of federal law. The employer answered, denying the claims and
promptly moving for summary judgment. In support of the motion,
the employer attached the mechanic's employment evaluations for
the past three years, which rated his skills and performance as poor
and culminated in a recommendation for his discharge.
What is the mechanic's best argument to defeat the summary
judgment motion?
Press Enter or Space to submit the answerAThe allegations in the
complaint conflict with the mechanic's employment evaluations,
raising a genuine dispute as to material facts.BThe employer cannot
rely in his motion on matters outside the pleadings.CThe essential
facts are unavailable to the mechanic and therefore discovery is
required.DThe motion was filed before the close of discovery..
Answer: (C) is correct. If the mechanic (the nonmovant) shows by
affidavit or declaration that he cannot present facts essential to
justify his opposition to the summary judgment motion, Rule 56(d)
authorizes him to ask the court to defer action or deny the motion to
allow time to obtain affidavits or declarations or to take discovery.
The employer moved for summary judgment right after answering
