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.
ADM315-78 BUSINESS LAW
PART 2- TRUE/FALSE & MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS (25 Points)
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:
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
PART 3- ESSAY QUESTIONS (50 Points)
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.
ADM315-78 BUSINESS LAW
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 uncles estate representatives
refused to pay the nephew and argued that there was no consideration for uncles
promise. Should the court uphold the agreement in this case?