B14. Brian’s pick–up truck collides with Miranda’s semi-trailer on a county highway.
Weighing Brian’s liability for the collision, Rachel, a judge, reasons by analogy. To
reason by analogy is to
a. compare the facts in previous cases and apply the same rule of law.
b. compile summaries of court decisions on particular topics.
c. employ logic through a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.
d. proceed from one point to another with the focal point being the result.
B15. Quinn is a state court judge. In the case of Royal Banners, Inc. v. Superior Flags Co.,
Quinn establishes a logical relationship by comparing the facts in the case to the facts
in other cases and, to the extent the facts are similar, applies the same rule. This is
a. deductive reasoning.
b. faulty reasoning.
c. linear reasoning.
d. reasoning by analogy.
B16. Julius is a judge. How the Julius and the judges in other courts interpret a particular
statute determines
a. how that statute will be applied.
b. how the law needs to be changed.
c. how the common law should be codified.
d. nothing.