Practice Quiz

Paralegal PACE Practice Test Questions - Question List

Select how would you like to study

Study Mode Free Daily Question Test Mode
11. The jury concluded that the driver of the brown car ran a red light at the intersection of Maple Drive and First Street while proceeding south on Maple Drive. Joan testified that she was driving her blue Toyota and headed west on First Street. She further testified that, as she approached Maple Drive, the light was green and that, as she proceeded through the intersection, a brown car collided with her Toyota. The jury accepted Joan’s testimony and concluded that the driver of the brown car negligently caused the collision. Evidence shows that Bob is the owner of the brown car. Based on these facts alone, was Bob negligent?
  1. Yes, because Bob is the owner of the vehicle.
  2. Yes, because the driver of the brown car was negligent.
  3. No, because Joan should not have driven through the intersection at that time.
  4. No, because no evidence shows that Bob was the driver of the brown car.
See answer
12. Which of the following is a correct citation to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, codified under Title 15 of the U.S. Code in sections 1-7?
  1. Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, 15 U.S.C. § 1-7 (2011).
  2. Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, U.S.C. § 15-1 - 7 (2011).
  3. 15 U.S.C. § 1-7 (1890).
  4. Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, 15 U.S.C. § 1-7 (1890).
See answer
13. Hannah is a paralegal working in the Minneapolis law firm of Jackson & Pollack. She is an enrolled member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe and moved to Minneapolis to work with Bill Tallbear, who practices extensively in federal Indian law. Bill is representing the Red Lake Chippewa Tribe in a lawsuit involving upstream pollution of a river that runs through reservation land. As Hannah is preparing to schedule depositions and draft a request for production, a member of the tribal council calls and says, “Hannah, the other day, Bill kept talking about ‘discovery,’ and how we had to do a bunch of stuff in response to discovery. I don’t understand this ‘discovery’ thing. Don’t like the sound of it. Reminds me of Chris Columbus, and we both know that ‘discovery’ didn’t work out too well for native peoples.” Of the options listed below, what is the paralegal’s best approach to answering the council member’s question?
  1. “Well, discovery in a lawsuit isn’t like Columbus’s discovery. In a lawsuit, discovery is the process that allows both sides to collect information relevant to the case. Both sides have the right to ask questions and request copies of documents. Then, each side works on identifying the most important evidence for use at trial.”
  2. “Well, councilman, you should really listen to Bill and do as he asks. Discovery is a really important part of the litigation process, and you can be sanctioned by the court if you don’t cooperate.”
  3. “Well, discovery in a lawsuit isn’t like Columbus’s discovery. In a lawsuit, discovery requires both sides to send a statement to the other side that gives the names of people with relevant information, copies of all documents and objects related to the case, a damages computation, and copies of insurance policies, if any.”
  4. “I’m sorry. I can’t answer that question because I would be engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. Would you like to talk to Bill?”
See answer
14. In a state that requires parallel citation of in-state cases, which of the following correctly cites to the 2010 Superior Court of Pennsylvania case of Albert Lockley v. CSX Transportation, Inc., found in Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports Vol. 2010, page 167, and Atlantic, 3d, Vol. 5, page 383 if cited in a pleading, motion, or appellate brief?
  1. Albert Lockley v. CSX Transp., Inc., 2010 Pa. Super. 167, 5 A.3d 383 (Super. Ct. 2010).
  2. Lockley v. CSX Transp., Inc., 2010 Pa. Super. 167 (Super. Ct. 2010).
  3. Lockley v. CSX Transp., Inc., 2010 Pa. Super. 167, 5 A.3d 383 (Super. Ct. 2010).
  4. Lockley v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 2010 Pa. Super. 167, 5 A.3d 383 (2010).
See answer
15. Select the answer choice that correctly completes the following:

All negligent drivers who caused a plaintiff’s injury are liable if the plaintiff suffered actual damages.
Plaintiff Paul suffered actual damages from Darlene’s negligent driving that caused his injury.
  1. Darlene caused Plaintiff Paul’s injury.
  2. Plaintiff Paul suffered actual damages.
  3. Darlene is liable for negligent driving.
  4. Darlene is liable for Plaintiff Paul’s actual damages.
See answer

Select how would you like to study

Study Mode Free Daily Question Test Mode