MBE Multistate Bar Examination 2026/2027 Practice Questions and Test Bank

During a murder trial, the prosecution calls a police officer who found a handwritten love letter during a lawful search of the defendant’s office. The prosecutor asks the officer to testify to the letter’s exact contents to establish the defendant’s motive. The original letter has not been offered or shown to be unavailable. What is the strongest objection? A. The testimony violates the rule against hearsay B. The testimony violates the best evidence rule C. The letter is irrelevant because motive is not an element of murder D. The officer lacks personal knowledge of where the letter was found Correct Answer: B. The testimony violates the best evidence rule Rationale: The best evidence rule generally requires production of the original writing when a party seeks to prove its contents. Oral testimony describing the exact language of the letter is secondary evidence and ordinarily is inadmissible unless the proponent establishes that the original was lost, destroyed without serious misconduct, or otherwise unavailable. Motive is relevant, and the officer has personal knowledge of discovering the letter. Question 2: An electric company deliberately leaves electricity flowing through a transformer located on abandoned property to prevent thieves from dismantling it. A trespasser sees warning signs but mistakenly assumes the electricity has been disconnected. He touches the transformer and suffers severe injuries. Which principle most strongly supports liability against the electric company? A. A property owner owes all trespassers a duty to make the premises safe B. Deadly force may be used whenever warning signs are posted C. Force likely to cause death or serious injury may not be used solely to protect property D. A trespasser automatically assumes the risk of any known danger Correct Answer: C. Force likely to cause death or serious injury may not be used solely to protect property Rationale: Reasonable force may be used to protect property, but deadly or seriously harmful force ordinarily may not be used when only property is threatened. The company intentionally maintained an indirectly dangerous condition to deter theft, even though it could not lawfully use comparable force directly. Warning signs do not create an unlimited privilege, and a trespasser does not automatically assume every risk associated with intentional misconduct. Question 3: A state exempts magazines from a receipts tax when at least 20% of their content concerns minority communities. A sports publisher that does not satisfy the content requirement challenges the tax after being denied the exemption. Which constitutional argument is strongest? A. The exemption violates the First Amendment because tax liability depends on publication content B. The exemption is valid because encouraging minority businesses is always a compelling interest C. The exemption violates equal protection because magazines are a suspect class D. The exemption is valid because tax exemptions can never burden freedom of the press Correct Answer: A. The exemption violates the First Amendment because tax liability depends on publication content Rationale: Although the press may be subject to generally applicable taxation, the government ordinarily may not impose or remove a tax based on the content of a publication without satisfying demanding constitutional review. Here, the exemption favors magazines containing a specified type of speech. Magazines are not a suspect class, and tax exemptions are not automatically valid merely because the government identifies a socially desirable objective. Question 4: A state statute prohibits noncitizens from working as civil engineers for any state or local governmental agency. A qualified lawful resident is denied a drafting-engineer position solely because she is not a United States citizen. Which standard will most likely govern her equal protection challenge? A. Rational basis review because all public employment involves government policymaking B. Intermediate scrutiny because alienage is a quasi-suspect classification C. Strict scrutiny because the position is not closely connected to democratic selfgovernment D. No constitutional review because noncitizens have no right to public employment Correct Answer: C. Strict scrutiny because the position is not closely connected to democratic self-government Rationale: State alienage classifications ordinarily receive strict scrutiny unless the position falls within the political-function exception, which applies to jobs closely connected to representative government, public policy, or the enforcement of governmental authority. A drafting or civil-engineering position generally does not perform that political function. Therefore, the state must show that the exclusion is necessary to achieve a compelling governmental interest. Question 5: Following a three-car collision, Driver A sues Drivers B and C in federal court. Judgment is entered against Driver A. Driver C later files a separate negligence action against Driver B for injuries arising from the same collision. May Driver C maintain the action? A. Yes, because a crossclaim arising from the same occurrence is permissive rather than compulsory B. No, because Driver C was required to assert the claim in the original action C. No, because claim preclusion bars every claim arising from the same accident D. Yes, but only if the original federal court expressly reserved the claim Correct Answer: A. Yes, because a crossclaim arising from the same occurrence is permissive rather than compulsory Rationale: A claim by one coparty against another arising from the same transaction or occurrence may be asserted as a crossclaim, but federal crossclaims are never compulsory. Driver C therefore did not lose the claim by failing to bring it earlier. Claim preclusion is also inapplicable because Driver C was not previously pursuing a claim against Driver B as the same claimant against the same defendant. Question 6: A motorist driving during daylight hours is rear-ended by a driver traveling 20 miles per hour above the posted speed limit. The motorist’s car has nonoperating headlights, which violates a criminal statute. Which result is most likely in the motorist’s negligence action? A. Recovery is barred because any statutory violation constitutes contributory negligence B. Recovery is reduced because the headlight violation automatically caused the collision C. The motorist may recover fully because the headlight statute was not designed to prevent this daytime rear-end collision D. Neither statutory violation may be considered in a civil action Correct Answer: C. The motorist may recover fully because the headlight statute was not designed to prevent this daytime rear-end collision Rationale: The speeding violation may establish negligence per se because the motorist belongs to the protected class and the statute seeks to prevent vehicle collisions. The defective-headlight statute does not establish contributory negligence unless the violation caused the type of harm the statute was intended to prevent. Nonworking headlights during daylight did not contribute to the rear-end collision, so the motorist’s recovery should not be reduced on that basis. Question 7: A person finds a lost dog and returns it to the owner. After the dog has been returned, the owner promises to pay the finder $200 at the end of the week. The finder initially declines but later demands payment. Why is the promise ordinarily unenforceable? A. The finder did not communicate acceptance within a reasonable time B. The promise was unsupported because returning the dog was past consideration C. Rewards may be enforced only when advertised publicly D. The contract was required to be in writing Correct Answer: B. The promise was unsupported because returning the dog was past consideration Rationale: Consideration must be bargained for in exchange for the promise. The finder had already located and returned the dog before the owner promised to pay. Because the completed performance was not induced by the promise, it constitutes past consideration and cannot support a contract. The later change of mind does not transform the earlier voluntary act into bargained-for consideration. Question 8: An older brother promises to pay his younger brother $15,000 if the younger brother reports to work sober and ready to work by 9:00 a.m. every day for 10 months. The younger brother fully complies, but the older brother dies before payment is due. May the younger brother recover from the estate? A. No, because family promises are presumed gratuitous B. No, because the younger brother had a preexisting duty to remain sober C. Yes, because the younger brother accepted a unilateral contract through complete performance D. Yes, but only under promissory estoppel Correct Answer: C. Yes, because the younger brother accepted a unilateral contract through complete performance Rationale: The older brother made an offer seeking acceptance through performance. The younger brother supplied consideration by refraining from conduct he had a legal right to engage in and by consistently satisfying the specified conditions. Once he completed the requested performance, the unilateral contract became enforceable. The older brother’s death does not discharge the estate’s contractual obligation to pay the promised amount. Question 9: A wholesaler contracts to purchase ionic hair dryers but receives less valuable hot-air dryers. She promptly notifies the manufacturer and decides to keep the delivered goods. What is the ordinary measure of her warranty damages? A. The full contract price, regardless of the goods’ value B. The difference between the goods’ value as delivered and their value as warranted C. The manufacturer’s profit on the transaction D. Punitive damages based solely on the nonconforming delivery Correct Answer: B. The difference between the goods’ value as delivered and their value as warranted Rationale: A buyer who accepts nonconforming goods and gives timely notice may recover damages for breach of warranty. The standard measure is the difference, at the time and place of acceptance, between the value of the goods received and the value they would have possessed if they had conformed to the contract. Appropriate incidental and consequential damages may also be recoverable when properly established. Question 10: A negligent driver strikes a bicyclist and breaks his right ankle. While the driver is helping him toward the curb, a negligent taxicab strikes and injures his left leg. Which allocation of liability is most accurate? A. Both defendants are jointly liable for all injuries B. The taxicab driver is liable for both injuries because the second collision was later in time C. The first driver is liable only for the ankle, and the taxicab driver only for the leg D. The bicyclist may recover the leg damages from either defendant but the ankle damages only from the first driver Correct Answer: D. The bicyclist may recover the leg damages from either defendant but the ankle damages only from the first driver Rationale: The first driver caused the ankle injury and also placed the bicyclist in the position where the second injury occurred. Both negligent acts may therefore be proximate causes of the leg injury, making both defendants potentially liable for it. The ankle injury, however, was complete before the taxicab arrived and is divisible from the later harm, so only the first driver is responsible for that injury.