1. 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.
1. 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.