Instructions: Recall the critical thinking process of “thinking like a lawyer.” Review the

case Masters v. Beck and answer the questions listed below.

1. (5pts.) Describe the critical thinking process lawyers use to analyze and brief a

case? Your book refers to this concept as the “basic building blocks in a legal

decision or argument.

2. (5pts.) Identify the facts in Masters v. Beck in less than 100 words.

3. 5pts.) What is a case “Issue?” Identify the “Issue” in Masters v. Beck

4. (5pts.) What is the “Rule of Law?” Identify the “Rule of Law” in Masters v.


5. (5pts.) What is a case “Reason and Conclusion?” Identify the “Reason and

Conclusion” in Masters v. Beck.



6. (5pts.) In order for a court to render a decision to affect a person, the court must


a. Personal Jurisdiction

b. Subject Matter Jurisdiction

c. In Rem Jurisdiction

d. Any of the above

7. (5pts.) A client must pay money to trigger the attorney client privilege. True/


8. (5pts.) Statutory Law is made by:

a. Congress

b. Judges

c. The President

d. None of the Above

9. (5pts.) A defendant has no control over the location of the trial. True/False

10. (5pts.) A judge that analyzes cases by examining human behavior and community

values more likely than not follows which School of Jurisprudence?

a. Feminist School

b. Sociological School

c. Natural Law School

d. Critical Legal Studies School


11. (25pts.) Osborne, a former chairman of the board of Lock Steel Company, entered

into a retirement agreement with Locke. Among other things, the agreement

stated that Osborne would continue doing consultations for the company and

Osborne would not work for any direct or indirect company competitors. In

exchange for these promises, the company agreed to pay Osborne $15,000 a year

for the rest of his life. After paying for two years, the company stopped payments

when Osborne and Osborne sued. The defendant Locke argued that there was no

consideration because the contract was based on past services, and thus there was

not detriment to the Osborne. Who won? Explain.


12. (25pts.) William Story promised his nephew that he would pay the nephew $5,000

if he gave up using tobacco, swearing, and playing cards until he was 21 years

old. The nephew did so and asked his uncle for the money. His uncle agreed to

pay, but the uncle suddenly died in a car crash. The uncle’s estate representatives

refused to pay the nephew and argued that there was no consideration for uncle’s

promise. Should the court uphold the agreement in this case?

Is this part of your assignment? ORDER NOW