MBE Practice Exam v2.0 — 150
Multiple-Choice Questions with
Answers and Rationales Advanced /
Mixed Difficulty — Comprehensive
Coverage a well detailed exam
2025/2026 graded A+ upgraded !!!
CIVIL PROCEDURE (Questions 1–22)
Question 1
A plaintiff filed a diversity action in federal court against a defendant who is a citizen of a foreign
country. The plaintiff is a citizen of State A. The amount in controversy is $80,000. The
defendant was properly served. The defendant now moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. How should the court rule?
A. Grant the motion, because the plaintiff and defendant are not citizens of different states.
B. Grant the motion, because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000.
C. Deny the motion, because diversity jurisdiction exists between a citizen of a state and a
citizen of a foreign country.
D. Deny the motion, because the court has federal question jurisdiction.
,Correct Answer: C
Rationale: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2), diversity jurisdiction exists between citizens of a state
and citizens or subjects of a foreign state. Complete diversity is not required when the
defendant is a foreign citizen, provided the plaintiff is a U.S. citizen. Here, the plaintiff is a citizen
of State A and the defendant is a citizen of a foreign country, so diversity exists. The amount in
controversy ($80,000) exceeds $75,000. Answer A is incorrect because the rule for foreign
defendants is different. Answer B is incorrect because the amount exceeds the threshold.
Answer D is incorrect because the claim is likely based on state law.
Question 2
A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court alleging violations of federal securities laws. The
defendant filed a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim, attaching
extrinsic documents that contradict the complaint's allegations. The plaintiff opposes
consideration of these documents. How should the court rule on the motion?
A. Grant the motion, because the court may consider extrinsic documents on a 12(b)(6) motion.
B. Deny the motion, because the court must convert the motion to one for summary judgment
if it considers extrinsic documents.
C. Deny the motion, but allow the defendant to refile as a motion for summary judgment.
D. Grant the motion only if the documents are matters of public record.
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(d), if a court considers matters outside the
pleadings on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment
under Rule 56, and all parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to present all pertinent
material. Therefore, the court cannot consider the extrinsic documents without converting the
motion. Answer A is incorrect because extrinsic evidence is generally not permitted. Answer C is
incorrect because the court should convert the motion, not simply deny it. Answer D is incorrect
because even public records may require conversion if they are not integral to the complaint.
Question 3
A plaintiff filed a class action in federal court seeking certification under Rule 23(b)(2)
(injunctive relief). The class consists of 1,000 individuals who were allegedly discriminated
against by the defendant's policies. The defendant argues that monetary damages are the
primary relief sought. Can the class be certified under Rule 23(b)(2)?
,A. Yes, because the class seeks injunctive relief.
B. Yes, because the class is numerous.
C. No, because Rule 23(b)(2) does not permit monetary damages.
D. No, because the class must satisfy the predominance requirement of Rule 23(b)(3).
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: Rule 23(b)(2) permits class certification when the party opposing the class has acted
on grounds that apply generally to the class, making final injunctive or declaratory relief
appropriate. However, monetary damages are not typically available under (b)(2) unless they
are incidental to the injunctive relief. If the primary relief sought is monetary damages,
certification under (b)(2) is inappropriate. Answer A is incorrect because the nature of the relief
is the key. Answer B is incorrect because numerosity alone is insufficient. Answer D is incorrect
because predominance is a (b)(3) requirement.
Question 4
A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court. The defendant answered and asserted a
counterclaim. The plaintiff moved to dismiss the counterclaim for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. The counterclaim arises from the same transaction as the plaintiff's claim but does
not satisfy the amount in controversy requirement. Is the court's jurisdiction proper?
A. Yes, because the counterclaim is compulsory and subject to supplemental jurisdiction.
B. Yes, because the counterclaim is permissive and subject to supplemental jurisdiction.
C. No, because the counterclaim does not satisfy the amount in controversy requirement.
D. No, because the court lacks original jurisdiction over the counterclaim.
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), supplemental jurisdiction extends to claims that are so
related to the original claim that they form part of the same case or controversy. Compulsory
counterclaims—those arising from the same transaction or occurrence—fall within
supplemental jurisdiction even if they lack an independent jurisdictional basis. Permissive
counterclaims require independent jurisdiction. Here, the counterclaim is compulsory, so the
court has jurisdiction. Answer B is incorrect because permissive counterclaims are not subject to
supplemental jurisdiction. Answer C is incorrect because supplemental jurisdiction obviates the
amount requirement. Answer D is incorrect because the court has supplemental jurisdiction.
Question 5
, A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court. The defendant timely removed the case from state
court based on diversity jurisdiction. The plaintiff moves to remand, arguing that the defendant
is a citizen of the same state as the plaintiff. The defendant's principal place of business is in
that state, but the defendant is incorporated in another state. Is removal proper?
A. Yes, because the defendant's citizenship is based on incorporation, not principal place of
business.
B. Yes, because the defendant is diverse.
C. No, because the defendant is a citizen of the plaintiff's state for diversity purposes.
D. No, because removal is not available in diversity cases.
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: For diversity purposes, a corporation is a citizen of both its state of incorporation and
its principal place of business. If the defendant's principal place of business is in the same state
as the plaintiff, complete diversity is destroyed, and removal is improper. Answer A is incorrect
because a corporation is a citizen of both states. Answer B is incorrect because diversity is
lacking. Answer D is incorrect because removal is available in diversity cases.
Question 6
A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court asserting a federal claim. The defendant moved to
dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). The court granted the motion with
prejudice. The plaintiff did not appeal. The plaintiff then filed a new action in state court based
on the same facts, asserting only state law claims. The defendant removed to federal court and
moved to dismiss based on res judicata. Should the court dismiss?
A. Yes, because the federal court's dismissal with prejudice is res judicata.
B. Yes, because the plaintiff is barred by claim preclusion.
C. No, because the federal court lacked jurisdiction over the state claims.
D. No, because res judicata does not apply when the first court lacked jurisdiction.
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: A dismissal with prejudice on the merits under Rule 12(b)(6) operates as an
adjudication on the merits and has res judicata (claim preclusion) effect. The plaintiff cannot
relitigate the same claims, even if asserting different legal theories based on the same facts.
Answer B is correct but A is more precise. Answer C is incorrect because the federal court had
jurisdiction over the federal claim and could exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state
claims. Answer D is incorrect because the court had jurisdiction.
Multiple-Choice Questions with
Answers and Rationales Advanced /
Mixed Difficulty — Comprehensive
Coverage a well detailed exam
2025/2026 graded A+ upgraded !!!
CIVIL PROCEDURE (Questions 1–22)
Question 1
A plaintiff filed a diversity action in federal court against a defendant who is a citizen of a foreign
country. The plaintiff is a citizen of State A. The amount in controversy is $80,000. The
defendant was properly served. The defendant now moves to dismiss for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. How should the court rule?
A. Grant the motion, because the plaintiff and defendant are not citizens of different states.
B. Grant the motion, because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000.
C. Deny the motion, because diversity jurisdiction exists between a citizen of a state and a
citizen of a foreign country.
D. Deny the motion, because the court has federal question jurisdiction.
,Correct Answer: C
Rationale: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2), diversity jurisdiction exists between citizens of a state
and citizens or subjects of a foreign state. Complete diversity is not required when the
defendant is a foreign citizen, provided the plaintiff is a U.S. citizen. Here, the plaintiff is a citizen
of State A and the defendant is a citizen of a foreign country, so diversity exists. The amount in
controversy ($80,000) exceeds $75,000. Answer A is incorrect because the rule for foreign
defendants is different. Answer B is incorrect because the amount exceeds the threshold.
Answer D is incorrect because the claim is likely based on state law.
Question 2
A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court alleging violations of federal securities laws. The
defendant filed a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim, attaching
extrinsic documents that contradict the complaint's allegations. The plaintiff opposes
consideration of these documents. How should the court rule on the motion?
A. Grant the motion, because the court may consider extrinsic documents on a 12(b)(6) motion.
B. Deny the motion, because the court must convert the motion to one for summary judgment
if it considers extrinsic documents.
C. Deny the motion, but allow the defendant to refile as a motion for summary judgment.
D. Grant the motion only if the documents are matters of public record.
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(d), if a court considers matters outside the
pleadings on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment
under Rule 56, and all parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to present all pertinent
material. Therefore, the court cannot consider the extrinsic documents without converting the
motion. Answer A is incorrect because extrinsic evidence is generally not permitted. Answer C is
incorrect because the court should convert the motion, not simply deny it. Answer D is incorrect
because even public records may require conversion if they are not integral to the complaint.
Question 3
A plaintiff filed a class action in federal court seeking certification under Rule 23(b)(2)
(injunctive relief). The class consists of 1,000 individuals who were allegedly discriminated
against by the defendant's policies. The defendant argues that monetary damages are the
primary relief sought. Can the class be certified under Rule 23(b)(2)?
,A. Yes, because the class seeks injunctive relief.
B. Yes, because the class is numerous.
C. No, because Rule 23(b)(2) does not permit monetary damages.
D. No, because the class must satisfy the predominance requirement of Rule 23(b)(3).
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: Rule 23(b)(2) permits class certification when the party opposing the class has acted
on grounds that apply generally to the class, making final injunctive or declaratory relief
appropriate. However, monetary damages are not typically available under (b)(2) unless they
are incidental to the injunctive relief. If the primary relief sought is monetary damages,
certification under (b)(2) is inappropriate. Answer A is incorrect because the nature of the relief
is the key. Answer B is incorrect because numerosity alone is insufficient. Answer D is incorrect
because predominance is a (b)(3) requirement.
Question 4
A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court. The defendant answered and asserted a
counterclaim. The plaintiff moved to dismiss the counterclaim for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. The counterclaim arises from the same transaction as the plaintiff's claim but does
not satisfy the amount in controversy requirement. Is the court's jurisdiction proper?
A. Yes, because the counterclaim is compulsory and subject to supplemental jurisdiction.
B. Yes, because the counterclaim is permissive and subject to supplemental jurisdiction.
C. No, because the counterclaim does not satisfy the amount in controversy requirement.
D. No, because the court lacks original jurisdiction over the counterclaim.
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), supplemental jurisdiction extends to claims that are so
related to the original claim that they form part of the same case or controversy. Compulsory
counterclaims—those arising from the same transaction or occurrence—fall within
supplemental jurisdiction even if they lack an independent jurisdictional basis. Permissive
counterclaims require independent jurisdiction. Here, the counterclaim is compulsory, so the
court has jurisdiction. Answer B is incorrect because permissive counterclaims are not subject to
supplemental jurisdiction. Answer C is incorrect because supplemental jurisdiction obviates the
amount requirement. Answer D is incorrect because the court has supplemental jurisdiction.
Question 5
, A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court. The defendant timely removed the case from state
court based on diversity jurisdiction. The plaintiff moves to remand, arguing that the defendant
is a citizen of the same state as the plaintiff. The defendant's principal place of business is in
that state, but the defendant is incorporated in another state. Is removal proper?
A. Yes, because the defendant's citizenship is based on incorporation, not principal place of
business.
B. Yes, because the defendant is diverse.
C. No, because the defendant is a citizen of the plaintiff's state for diversity purposes.
D. No, because removal is not available in diversity cases.
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: For diversity purposes, a corporation is a citizen of both its state of incorporation and
its principal place of business. If the defendant's principal place of business is in the same state
as the plaintiff, complete diversity is destroyed, and removal is improper. Answer A is incorrect
because a corporation is a citizen of both states. Answer B is incorrect because diversity is
lacking. Answer D is incorrect because removal is available in diversity cases.
Question 6
A plaintiff filed a complaint in federal court asserting a federal claim. The defendant moved to
dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). The court granted the motion with
prejudice. The plaintiff did not appeal. The plaintiff then filed a new action in state court based
on the same facts, asserting only state law claims. The defendant removed to federal court and
moved to dismiss based on res judicata. Should the court dismiss?
A. Yes, because the federal court's dismissal with prejudice is res judicata.
B. Yes, because the plaintiff is barred by claim preclusion.
C. No, because the federal court lacked jurisdiction over the state claims.
D. No, because res judicata does not apply when the first court lacked jurisdiction.
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: A dismissal with prejudice on the merits under Rule 12(b)(6) operates as an
adjudication on the merits and has res judicata (claim preclusion) effect. The plaintiff cannot
relitigate the same claims, even if asserting different legal theories based on the same facts.
Answer B is correct but A is more precise. Answer C is incorrect because the federal court had
jurisdiction over the federal claim and could exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state
claims. Answer D is incorrect because the court had jurisdiction.
