Free CCTA Practice Questions

Question 1

Opposing counsel demands that a buyer's entire law firm withdraw from a trial over the sale of a machine shop. A partner who handled the closing is a necessary witness about a disputed oral assurance. Her testimony supports the buyer and creates no current-client or former-client conflict. The firm's trial lawyer was not at the closing and will not testify. Under the ABA Model Rules, the trial lawyer may:

Accepted Answer

Continue the representation; the partner's testimony does not itself disqualify other lawyers in the firm.

Answer

Withdraw from the trial because the partner's necessary testimony disqualifies every lawyer in the firm.

Answer

Remain only if replacing the firm would impose substantial hardship on the buyer.

Answer

Remain only if opposing counsel consents to the partner testifying while a colleague conducts the trial.

Question 2

Two days after a solvent spill, Vega calmly tells a clinic nurse: "Solvent splashed into my eyes. My coworker says the tank manufacturer skipped its pressure test." The nurse accurately records the history in a record that qualifies under the business-records exception. The exposure history guides treatment; the pressure-test account has no diagnostic or treatment relevance. Neither Vega nor her coworker has worked for the manufacturer. In her federal suit against the manufacturer, Vega offers the entry to prove both statements. What survives the hearsay objection?

Accepted Answer

The exposure history, with the pressure-test account redacted.

Answer

Both statements, because they appear in a qualifying medical record.

Answer

Neither statement, because neither speaker owed the clinic a reporting duty.

Answer

Both statements, but only after both speakers are shown unavailable.

Question 3

At 4 p.m., a manufacturer seeks emergency relief in federal court. Its verified complaint includes messages showing that a former engineer will publish a secret formula at midnight, or immediately if warned. Counsel certifies in writing that notice was not attempted because it would trigger disclosure. The judge finds likely success, imminent irreparable harm, and favorable equities and public interest. Required security is posted; an adversary hearing cannot occur before midnight. The judge's next step should be to:

Accepted Answer

Enter a 10-day temporary restraining order and expedite the preliminary-injunction hearing.

Answer

Issue a preliminary injunction through trial, then give the engineer notice and an opportunity to challenge it.

Answer

Issue an initial 28-day temporary restraining order to leave sufficient time for an adversary hearing.

Answer

Defer relief until the engineer has notice and an opportunity to respond.

Question 4

The pleadings and ownership records in a $600,000 federal contract action show:
Plaintiff: a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Texas.
Defendant: an LLC organized in Nevada with its principal place of business in Texas.
LLC members: a U.S. citizen domiciled in Colorado who manages the business, and a passive corporation incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in New York. There are no other members.
The claim arises solely under state law. Which citizenship analysis is correct?

Accepted Answer

Complete diversity fails because the LLC's corporate member and the plaintiff are both Delaware citizens.

Answer

Complete diversity exists because the plaintiff was incorporated in Delaware and the LLC was organized in Nevada.

Answer

Complete diversity exists because only the managing member's Colorado citizenship is attributed to the LLC.

Answer

Complete diversity fails because both litigating entities maintain their principal places of business in Texas.

Question 5

A retained damages expert has delivered her signed report in a federal action. Opposing counsel requests her earlier report drafts, emails with counsel about her compensation, and counsel's factual spreadsheets that she considered but rejected when forming her opinion. No independent privilege applies to the spreadsheets. Which materials fall outside Rule 26(b)(4)'s protections for expert drafts and attorney communications?

Accepted Answer

The compensation emails and the spreadsheets, even though she rejected the data.

Answer

The spreadsheets, but neither the drafts nor the emails discussing her compensation.

Answer

The compensation emails, but neither the drafts nor the spreadsheets she ultimately rejected.

Answer

All three categories, because disclosing the final report waived their protection.

Question 6

An engineering firm agrees to complete a project for $180,000. When the client wrongfully terminates the contract, the firm has received $60,000 and spent $40,000 on performance. Completing the project would have required another $70,000. The firm retains the payment already received, has no substitute work available, and proves no other loss. Applying expectation damages, what additional amount would put the firm in the financial position full performance would have produced?

Accepted Answer

$50,000

Answer

$70,000

Answer

$110,000

Answer

$120,000

Question 7

"The defense never moved again after presenting its own witnesses," plaintiff's counsel argues in opposing a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law. In this federal jury case, the defendant made a sufficiently specific Rule 50(a) causation challenge after the plaintiff rested. The judge denied it. The defendant renewed that same challenge 20 days after entry of judgment on the plaintiff's verdict. Which statement governs the objection?

Accepted Answer

The motion may proceed because causation was preserved and renewal was within 28 days.

Answer

The motion is barred; presenting defense evidence required another motion at the close of all evidence.

Answer

The motion may proceed only if accompanied by a request for a new trial under Rule 59.

Answer

The motion is barred unless the judge expressly reserved decision when denying the original motion.

Question 8

An engineer compares a failed coupling with couplings from the defendant's production line. Blinded validation of her method falsely classified 12 of 400 known nonmatching couplings as matches. At a federal product-liability trial, she proposes a 99.9% probability that the failed coupling came from that line, citing only those validation figures. She is qualified, but offers no further quantitative support. The central admissibility issue is whether the court should:

Accepted Answer

Require a reliable basis for the 99.9% attribution; the validation figures alone do not establish that probability.

Answer

Limit the attribution to 97%, the percentage of nonmatching couplings correctly rejected during validation.

Answer

Admit the 99.9% attribution because most validation results were correct, satisfying the more-likely-than-not standard for admitting expert testimony.

Answer

Treat the 99.9% attribution as a matter of weight because the report discloses error data available for cross-examination.

Question 9

A Florida retailer sues two Georgia suppliers in Florida state court, asserting joint liability for a $280,000 contract loss. Those are the parties' only citizenships, and both suppliers are properly served. One timely removes under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a); the other expressly refuses consent. Six weeks after removal, the retailer first moves to remand solely for lack of unanimous consent. What controls the disposition of this motion?

Accepted Answer

The motion should be denied because this procedural objection was raised after the 30-day remand deadline.

Answer

The case must be remanded because unanimous consent is necessary to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction.

Answer

The case must be remanded unless the removing supplier proves that missing consent caused no litigation prejudice.

Answer

The motion should be denied because the 30-day remand period runs from service of the state complaint.

Question 10

Park testifies about falling on a hotel stairway. The defense attacks his memory, citing a head injury he suffered six months after the fall. Park offers an authenticated, unsworn recording made two weeks after the fall, before that injury, giving the same account he has just given in the federal civil trial. He remains subject to cross-examination about it. No charge of fabrication or improper influence has been made. In responding to the memory attack, the recording may be used:

Accepted Answer

For its truth as well as to rehabilitate Park's credibility.

Answer

To rehabilitate credibility, but not as substantive evidence of the fall.

Answer

Only if Park made the statement under oath in a proceeding.

Answer

Only if it also predates a motive to pursue damages.

Free CCTA Practice Questions

Domain 1: Professional Responsibility

Question 1

Domain 2: Evaluation, Remedies and Defenses

Question 2

Domain 3: Jurisdiction, Venue and Joinder

Question 3

Question 4

Domain 4: Practice and Procedures

Question 5

Question 6

Domain 5: Evidence

Question 7

Domain 6: Hearsay/Exceptions/Exemptions (Non-Hearsay)

Question 8

Question 9

Domain 7: Discovery

Question 10

That's 10 of 1,030