benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU / A plaintiff alleges in a lawsuit against a store that he purchased a hot dog…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

A plaintiff alleges in a lawsuit against a store that he purchased a hot dog with chili that gave him food poisoning and caused him excruciating pain. The store offers into evidence certified copies of court proceedings revealing that the plaintiff has filed three similar lawsuits in the last 18 months against other convenience stores, claiming food poisoning resulting from the purchase of food from those stores. These copies should be ruled

choices

  1. inadmissible, because of the best evidence rule.
  2. inadmissible, because they are irrelevant to the present claim.
  3. inadmissible, because there is the danger of undue prejudice to the plaintiff, which outweighs the probative value of the evidence.
  4. admissible, because they establish a pattern of similar actions.

subject

professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

Official source

initial import