A suspect was arrested on a charge of bank robbery. After formal charges had been filed, the suspect was scheduled for a lineup identification procedure. The suspect’s attorney was notified of the lineup and arrived at the station prior to the scheduled lineup. He was directed to wait in the hallway outside the lineup room. When the suspect was escorted into the lineup room, the officer acknowledged the attorney but did not motion for him to follow them into the lineup room. The attorney remained seated in the hallway. Inside the lineup room, the six members of the lineup, including the suspect, stood on one side of the one-way mirror in full view of the witnesses gathered on the other side in the viewing area. The lineup members stepped forward one by one for a closer inspection. After the first two lineup members had been presented, an officer realized that the suspect’s attorney was not present and immediately escorted him to the viewing area. The attorney arrived in time to witness the presentation of the suspect and the remaining three members of the lineup. Two witnesses then identified the suspect as the robber.  At trial, if the defense objects to the introduction of the lineup evidence, should the objection be granted?

Match the following brain structures with their functions

An owner and a contractor executed a contract providing that the contractor was to construct a three-story, castle-like structure on a specified location according to plans and specifications drawn up by an architect. The total contract price was $900,000. No date was included in the contract for completion of the home, but the builder was to begin construction one week after the contract was signed. The day after the contract was signed by the parties, the state development commission declared the land encompassing the owner’s lot part of a natural wilderness area, requiring that all residences constructed therein be single story and have plans approved by the development commission. The original plans for the three-story structure are totally incompatible with the commission’s guidelines for residences in a wilderness area.  Must the builder perform the contract?

What is the function of the following highlighted structure. Mark all that apply.

A large delivery truck collided with a car. At the time of the accident, the driver of the truck said to the car driver, “The accident was my fault; I wasn’t paying any attention. Don’t worry, my company will make it right.” The delivery company had not authorized the truck driver to make that statement. The subsequent investigation of the accident by the delivery company revealed that the truck driver had been drinking on the day of the accident. He was fired. The car driver brings an appropriate action against the delivery company for damages resulting from the accident. The truck driver has disappeared. The car driver now seeks to testify as to what the truck driver said at the time of the accident.  Is the evidence admissible?

A woman’s boyfriend came to her apartment with a mink coat in his arms and handed it to the woman. After the boyfriend told her that the coat was now hers, the woman asked him where he got the coat. The boyfriend answered, “From the Easter Bunny.” After the boyfriend left, she tried on the coat and admired how good it looked on her in the mirror. The next day, the woman read in the newspaper that the home of a well-known socialite had been burglarized the night before. Among the missing items, according to the paper, was a mink coat. The woman took the coat from the closet and rifled through the pockets. She found a handkerchief with the monogram matching the initials of the well-known socialite. The woman decided to keep the fur coat, thinking to herself that the socialite could probably afford to buy another coat.  Which of the following best describes the crime or crimes, if any, the woman has committed?

An automobile manufacturer entered into a contract with a well-known tire distributor. The contract provided that the distributor would deliver to the automobile manufacturer 1,000 tires on the 15th of each month for $50,000 per shipment, with payment due upon receipt.  The automobile manufacturer and the tire distributor properly fulfilled their contractual obligations for two months. The day after the third tire delivery, the tire distributor’s president visited the automobile manufacturer and found the automobiles produced with his company’s tires to be a “disgrace.” To protect the tire distributor’s reputation, the president announced that he will not send any additional tire shipments. The automobile manufacturer immediately brought a breach of contract action against the tire distributor. Which party is likely to prevail in the breach of contract suit?

While at a party, a wife came up behind a younger woman, grabbed her by her arm, and accused her of having an affair with the wife’s husband. The wife knew that her accusation was not true.  Of the following facts, which would be most helpful to the younger woman in a suit against the wife for intentional infliction of emotional distress?

Which of the following brain waves would you expect to find in an individual experiencing deep sleep?  

A homeowner owned a parcel of land on which she built a single-family residence. To pay for the construction, she obtained financing from a bank in exchange for a mortgage on the land. The bank promptly and properly recorded its mortgage. When the house was completed, except for the absence of an oven in the kitchen, the homeowner leased the house to a tenant for a three-year term. There was no provision in the lease agreement regarding kitchen appliances. The homeowner bought an oven from an appliance company and had it installed in the space provided around the built-in cabinets in the kitchen. To make the purchase, the homeowner signed a security agreement with the appliance company granting it a security interest in the oven in exchange for financing. The appliance company did not file or record its security interest in the oven.  By the end of the lease term, the homeowner was in serious default on her mortgage payments to the bank and to the appliance company. In preparing foreclosure proceedings against the homeowner, the bank learned that the tenant was planning to remove the oven and take it with him when he moved out within the next few weeks. The bank filed an action against the tenant claiming ownership of the oven, and joined the homeowner and the appliance company as parties. Which party has a superior claim to the oven?