SIVE STUDY GUIDE|A+ STUDY RESOURCE | BRAND NEW 2026/2027
Jake took a walk in the evening and saw a man dressed in black and wearing a hoodie stand-
ing in a dark alley. The man was watching elderly females walk down a street. Jake said as he
passed the man, "it's better to do that after midnight. Crowly Street, less cameras. A ski
mask works best." That night, a man in a ski mask, Paul, was arrested for larceny after steal-
ing money from an elderly woman who was walking on Crowly Street. Jake was subse-
quently arrested. At trial, the only evidence against Jake was Paul's testimony. Which of the
following is true?
A. Jake is likely to be convicted because it is likely that he believed it was probable that Paul
was about to commit a crime and rendered aid to Paul nonetheless
B. Jake is likely to be convicted because Jake is an accomplice to Paul's crime
C. Jake is not likely to be convicted because the only evidence against him is Paul's testimony
D. Jake is not likely to be co -
ANSWER
(C) "A person is guilty of criminal facilitation in the fourth degree when, believing it proba-
ble that he is rendering aid . . . to a person who intends to commit a crime, he engages in
conduct which provides such person with means or opportunity for the commission thereof
and which in fact aids such person to commit a felony . . . ." Penal Law § 115.00 (1).
"A person shall not be convicted of criminal facilitation upon the testimony of a person who
has committed the felony charged to have been facilitated unless such testimony be corrob-
orated by such other evidence as tends to connect the defendant with such facilitation." Pe-
nal Law § 115.15.
Susan and Carol got engaged on June 1, 2018. During this period, they discussed a pre-nup-
tial agreement and orally agreed that neither party will pay alimony in the event of a di-
vorce. The couple wed on June 1, 2019. One year and one day later, Carol filed for divorce
after Susan cheated on Carol. Susan is now an emotional wreck and has lost her job due to
the stress. May Susan seek alimony?
1
,A. Yes, because the parties were married for more than one year
B. Yes, because the pre-nuptial agreement was not in writing
C. No, because a pre-nuptial agreement denying alimony to each party was formed
D. No, because the parties were not married for up to 10 years -
ANSWER
(B) "An agreement by the parties, made before or during the marriage, shall be valid and
enforceable in a matrimonial action if such agreement is in writing, subscribed by the par-
ties, and acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded."
DRL § 236 (b)(3).
Paul and Peter were married for 10 years and have two children. In 2019, Paul lost his job.
The financial stress deteriorated the marriage, which caused Peter to file for divorce. Peter is
seeking joint custody and maintenance from Paul. How should the court calculate mainte-
nance and child support?
A. The parties calculate child support and seek court approval for maintenance
B. Child support should be calculated first
C. Maintenance should be calculated first
D. Child support and maintenance should be calculated concurrently -
ANSWER
(C) "Maintenance shall be calculated prior to child support because the amount of mainte-
nance shall be subtracted from the payor's income and added to the payee's income as part
of the calculation of the child support obligation." DRL § 236 (B) (6) (c) (1) (g).
Paul recently formed Company, Inc. and serves as its president. After establishing the board
and shareholders, the company now wants to hire an officer. The certificate of incorporation
is silent on how an officer may be elected. The company interviewed Jake and wants to elect
him as an officer. How may the company elect Jake?
A. Paul alone may elect Jake
2
,B. The shareholders alone may elect Jake
C. The board alone may elect Jake
D. The board or shareholders may elect Jake -
ANSWER
(C) "(a) The board may elect or appoint a president, one or more vice-presidents, a secre-
tary and a treasurer, and such other officers as it may determine, or as may be provided in
the by-laws.
(b) The certificate of incorporation may provide that all officers or that specified officers shall
be elected by the shareholders instead of by the board." BCL § 715 (2021).
Brandon sued his former friend, Jason, after Brandon fell to the ground and injured himself
while leaving Jason's property. Brandon was on the property to confront Jason about lying,
but he had visited the property several times in the past. If Brandon loses the case, it will be
because:
A. Brandon was a trespasser
B. Brandon was an invitee
C. Jason did not maintain the property with reasonable care
D. Brandon was a licensee -
ANSWER
(C) New York courts have "abandoned the classifications [of licensee, trespasser, invitee] en-
tirely and announced our adherence to the single standard of reasonable care . . . ." Basso v
Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 241 (1976). "An owner, lessee or occupant of premises, whether or not
posted as provided in section 11-2111 of the environmental conservation law , owes no duty
to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for hunting, fishing, organized gleaning
as defined in section seventy-one-y of the agriculture and markets law , canoeing, boating,
trapping, hiking, cross-country skiing, tobogganing, sledding, speleological activities, horse-
back riding, bicycle riding, hang gliding, motorized vehicle operation for recreational pur-
poses, snowmobile operation, cutting or gathering of wood for non-commercial purposes or
training of dogs, or to give warning of any hazardous condition or use of or structure or ac-
tivity on such premises to persons entering for such purposes." GOL 9-103.
3
, Jennifer sued Adam in a special proceeding by filing a petition. Adam responded with his an-
swer and counterclaim, which raised a new issue. Jennifer responded with a reply. Adam re-
sponded with a surreply and separately asked for leave of court to file a motion to join an-
other party. Which of the following was NOT a proper response in the action?
A. Adam's motion to join another party
B. Adam's surreply
C. Jennifer's reply
D. Adam's counterclaim -
ANSWER
"Parties. The party commencing a special proceeding shall be styled the petitioner and any
adverse party the respondent. After a proceeding is commenced, no party shall be joined or
interpleaded and no third-party practice or intervention shall be allowed, except by leave of
court." CPLR § 401.
"There shall be a petition, which shall comply with the requirements for a complaint in an
action, and an answer where there is an adverse party. There shall be a reply to a counter-
claim denominated as such and there may be a reply to new matter in the answer in any
case. The court may permit such other pleadings as are authorized in an action upon such
terms as it may specify. Where there is no adverse party the petition shall state the result of
any prior application for similar relief and shall specify the new facts, if any, that were not
previously shown." CPLR § 402
Luke owned Blackacre and sold it to Timothy in January 2020. Timothy, a bona fide pur-
chaser, did not record the conveyance. In March 2020, Luke sold Blackacre to Sarah, a bona
fide purchaser, who recorded the conveyance in March 2020. In April 2020, Timothy rec-
orded the conveyance. Who owns the property in May 2020?
A. Timothy, because he is the first bona fide purchaser
B. Timothy, because he is the first bona fide purchaser and also recorded
C. Sarah, because she is the last bona fide purchaser
D. Sarah, because she is a bona fide purchaser who recorded first -
4
Jake took a walk in the evening and saw a man dressed in black and wearing a hoodie stand-
ing in a dark alley. The man was watching elderly females walk down a street. Jake said as he
passed the man, "it's better to do that after midnight. Crowly Street, less cameras. A ski
mask works best." That night, a man in a ski mask, Paul, was arrested for larceny after steal-
ing money from an elderly woman who was walking on Crowly Street. Jake was subse-
quently arrested. At trial, the only evidence against Jake was Paul's testimony. Which of the
following is true?
A. Jake is likely to be convicted because it is likely that he believed it was probable that Paul
was about to commit a crime and rendered aid to Paul nonetheless
B. Jake is likely to be convicted because Jake is an accomplice to Paul's crime
C. Jake is not likely to be convicted because the only evidence against him is Paul's testimony
D. Jake is not likely to be co -
ANSWER
(C) "A person is guilty of criminal facilitation in the fourth degree when, believing it proba-
ble that he is rendering aid . . . to a person who intends to commit a crime, he engages in
conduct which provides such person with means or opportunity for the commission thereof
and which in fact aids such person to commit a felony . . . ." Penal Law § 115.00 (1).
"A person shall not be convicted of criminal facilitation upon the testimony of a person who
has committed the felony charged to have been facilitated unless such testimony be corrob-
orated by such other evidence as tends to connect the defendant with such facilitation." Pe-
nal Law § 115.15.
Susan and Carol got engaged on June 1, 2018. During this period, they discussed a pre-nup-
tial agreement and orally agreed that neither party will pay alimony in the event of a di-
vorce. The couple wed on June 1, 2019. One year and one day later, Carol filed for divorce
after Susan cheated on Carol. Susan is now an emotional wreck and has lost her job due to
the stress. May Susan seek alimony?
1
,A. Yes, because the parties were married for more than one year
B. Yes, because the pre-nuptial agreement was not in writing
C. No, because a pre-nuptial agreement denying alimony to each party was formed
D. No, because the parties were not married for up to 10 years -
ANSWER
(B) "An agreement by the parties, made before or during the marriage, shall be valid and
enforceable in a matrimonial action if such agreement is in writing, subscribed by the par-
ties, and acknowledged or proven in the manner required to entitle a deed to be recorded."
DRL § 236 (b)(3).
Paul and Peter were married for 10 years and have two children. In 2019, Paul lost his job.
The financial stress deteriorated the marriage, which caused Peter to file for divorce. Peter is
seeking joint custody and maintenance from Paul. How should the court calculate mainte-
nance and child support?
A. The parties calculate child support and seek court approval for maintenance
B. Child support should be calculated first
C. Maintenance should be calculated first
D. Child support and maintenance should be calculated concurrently -
ANSWER
(C) "Maintenance shall be calculated prior to child support because the amount of mainte-
nance shall be subtracted from the payor's income and added to the payee's income as part
of the calculation of the child support obligation." DRL § 236 (B) (6) (c) (1) (g).
Paul recently formed Company, Inc. and serves as its president. After establishing the board
and shareholders, the company now wants to hire an officer. The certificate of incorporation
is silent on how an officer may be elected. The company interviewed Jake and wants to elect
him as an officer. How may the company elect Jake?
A. Paul alone may elect Jake
2
,B. The shareholders alone may elect Jake
C. The board alone may elect Jake
D. The board or shareholders may elect Jake -
ANSWER
(C) "(a) The board may elect or appoint a president, one or more vice-presidents, a secre-
tary and a treasurer, and such other officers as it may determine, or as may be provided in
the by-laws.
(b) The certificate of incorporation may provide that all officers or that specified officers shall
be elected by the shareholders instead of by the board." BCL § 715 (2021).
Brandon sued his former friend, Jason, after Brandon fell to the ground and injured himself
while leaving Jason's property. Brandon was on the property to confront Jason about lying,
but he had visited the property several times in the past. If Brandon loses the case, it will be
because:
A. Brandon was a trespasser
B. Brandon was an invitee
C. Jason did not maintain the property with reasonable care
D. Brandon was a licensee -
ANSWER
(C) New York courts have "abandoned the classifications [of licensee, trespasser, invitee] en-
tirely and announced our adherence to the single standard of reasonable care . . . ." Basso v
Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 241 (1976). "An owner, lessee or occupant of premises, whether or not
posted as provided in section 11-2111 of the environmental conservation law , owes no duty
to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for hunting, fishing, organized gleaning
as defined in section seventy-one-y of the agriculture and markets law , canoeing, boating,
trapping, hiking, cross-country skiing, tobogganing, sledding, speleological activities, horse-
back riding, bicycle riding, hang gliding, motorized vehicle operation for recreational pur-
poses, snowmobile operation, cutting or gathering of wood for non-commercial purposes or
training of dogs, or to give warning of any hazardous condition or use of or structure or ac-
tivity on such premises to persons entering for such purposes." GOL 9-103.
3
, Jennifer sued Adam in a special proceeding by filing a petition. Adam responded with his an-
swer and counterclaim, which raised a new issue. Jennifer responded with a reply. Adam re-
sponded with a surreply and separately asked for leave of court to file a motion to join an-
other party. Which of the following was NOT a proper response in the action?
A. Adam's motion to join another party
B. Adam's surreply
C. Jennifer's reply
D. Adam's counterclaim -
ANSWER
"Parties. The party commencing a special proceeding shall be styled the petitioner and any
adverse party the respondent. After a proceeding is commenced, no party shall be joined or
interpleaded and no third-party practice or intervention shall be allowed, except by leave of
court." CPLR § 401.
"There shall be a petition, which shall comply with the requirements for a complaint in an
action, and an answer where there is an adverse party. There shall be a reply to a counter-
claim denominated as such and there may be a reply to new matter in the answer in any
case. The court may permit such other pleadings as are authorized in an action upon such
terms as it may specify. Where there is no adverse party the petition shall state the result of
any prior application for similar relief and shall specify the new facts, if any, that were not
previously shown." CPLR § 402
Luke owned Blackacre and sold it to Timothy in January 2020. Timothy, a bona fide pur-
chaser, did not record the conveyance. In March 2020, Luke sold Blackacre to Sarah, a bona
fide purchaser, who recorded the conveyance in March 2020. In April 2020, Timothy rec-
orded the conveyance. Who owns the property in May 2020?
A. Timothy, because he is the first bona fide purchaser
B. Timothy, because he is the first bona fide purchaser and also recorded
C. Sarah, because she is the last bona fide purchaser
D. Sarah, because she is a bona fide purchaser who recorded first -
4
