A brown car ran a red light at the intersection of Oak Avenue and President’s Way while proceeding south on Oak Drive. Joan was driving her Prius and headed east on President’s Way. As she approached Oak Avenue, the light was green and she proceeded through the intersection, but a collision occurred between Joan’s car and the brown car. Bob is the owner of the brown car, but Bob was not driving the brown car at the time of the collision. Kara is a paralegal and employed by an attorney who is considering filing a negligence suit on behalf of Joan. The attorney asks Kara to review the facts of Joan’s case and determine whether any additional investigation of the facts is necessary. Should Kara report that additional investigation is needed?
Explanation
Answer: D - Yes, because nothing is known about why another person was driving Bob’s car. More factual information is needed because nothing is known about why another person was driving Bob’s car. Here, the test-taker needs to recognize that Kara’s employer represents Joan, who may have a negligence claim. Kara’s employer will need to consider all the possible defendants, and since Bob is the owner of the brown car, Kara’s employer will need to know the connection (if any) between Bob and the driver of the brown car. Answer A is not true. Answer B suggests an inappropriate response to a client. Answer C, even if true, does not focus on identifying all possible defendants.
