Legal Writing and Drafting Practice Questions

Q: Using only the supplied file and legal resources, draft a settlement demand letter to the insurer's claims adjuster on behalf of Ruiz, for the supervising attorney's review before it is sent. Assess the parties' likely negligence and comparative-fault positions, evaluate the documented damages and evidentiary weaknesses, and set out an opening demand, a reasoned justification for that demand, and a response to the insurer's offer. Identify the most important additional investigation and the matters that must be discussed with Ruiz before any settlement commitment. The client prefers a prompt resolution but has not authorized acceptance, rejection, or a minimum amount. Do not conduct outside research or assume facts absent from the supplied materials.

A strong demand letter should integrate the obstructed alley, witness account, and bicycle-lane facts rather than treating any single fact as dispositive. It should recognize a substantial negligence argument against Lee while candidly addressing comparative-fault risk from Ruiz's brief glance at her phone (to the extent appropriate for an external audience). The damages discussion should separate documented losses from the unsupported business-loss figure and should account for pain and activity limitations without inventing a value. The demand and its justification should be reasoned rather than arbitrary, respond to the insurer's current offer, and preserve time for targeted investigation. The letter and accompanying analysis must also preserve Ruiz's exclusive settlement authority and recommend informed counseling before any binding response.

Q: Using only the supplied file and legal resources, draft a negotiation letter responding to Apex Roofing's demand, identifying the parties' strongest contractual positions, and proposing concrete terms that protect Harbor Youth Center's safety, budget, and reopening objectives.

An effective letter should acknowledge Apex's credible substantial-performance argument (Exhibit B) while firmly addressing the unauthorized membrane substitution and incomplete drain work identified in the architect's report (Exhibit C). It should reject or reserve the unsupported $9,000 increase because Exhibit A's Change Order clause requires a signed change order, and no such signed document appears in Exhibit B. Exhibit C supports a practical cure involving upgraded flashing and an extended membrane warranty rather than economically wasteful full replacement. A milestone proposal using the $36,000 escrow authorized under Exhibit A can protect both completion and payment interests while facilitating the Center's reopening. The letter must preserve unresolved claims, stay within the Executive Director's $36,000 settlement authority (Exhibit D), and accept the pre-suit meeting required under Exhibit A's dispute-resolution clause, all in a constructive tone.

Question 1

Using only the supplied file and legal resources, draft a settlement demand letter to the insurer's claims adjuster on behalf of Ruiz, for the supervising attorney's review before it is sent. Assess the parties' likely negligence and comparative-fault positions, evaluate the documented damages and evidentiary weaknesses, and set out an opening demand, a reasoned justification for that demand, and a response to the insurer's offer. Identify the most important additional investigation and the matters that must be discussed with Ruiz before any settlement commitment. The client prefers a prompt resolution but has not authorized acceptance, rejection, or a minimum amount. Do not conduct outside research or assume facts absent from the supplied materials.

Question 2

Using only the supplied file and legal resources, draft a negotiation letter responding to Apex Roofing's demand, identifying the parties' strongest contractual positions, and proposing concrete terms that protect Harbor Youth Center's safety, budget, and reopening objectives.

Question 3

A lawyer jointly represents three co-owners of a food truck business in a single lawsuit against a supplier for breach of contract. The supplier offers $150,000 to settle all three clients' claims collectively but does not specify how the amount would be divided among them. Two of the clients favor accepting the aggregate offer; the third is undecided and has not yet been consulted about the proposed division of proceeds. Which of the following is the most appropriate response?

Accepted Answer

Communicate the proposed aggregate settlement and its terms to each client, including the existence and nature of all the claims involved and the proposed division of proceeds, and obtain each client's informed written consent before accepting.

Answer

Accept the offer because a majority of the clients favor settlement.

Answer

Decline the offer without consulting the clients because aggregate settlements are not permitted among jointly represented clients.

Answer

Accept the offer on behalf of the two consenting clients and continue litigating separately for the third.

Question 4

A lawyer researching whether a non-compete clause is enforceable finds two decisions on point. The first is a decision from the highest court of a neighboring state, directly addressing the issue and ruling in the client's favor. The second is a decision from the intermediate appellate court in the lawyer's own jurisdiction, addressing a similar issue but reaching a different conclusion. Which authority should the lawyer treat as controlling?

Accepted Answer

The in-jurisdiction intermediate appellate court decision, because it is mandatory authority in the jurisdiction, while the out-of-state decision is merely persuasive.

Answer

The neighboring state's highest court decision, because higher courts have greater authority regardless of jurisdiction.

Answer

Whichever decision is more recent, because courts generally follow the most current precedent available.

Answer

Neither decision, because only statutes constitute binding authority in this jurisdiction.

Question 5

A lawyer represents a restaurant owner in a defamation action against a former supplier. The client told the lawyer, “I want my reputation restored, but I cannot spend another year in litigation. I would consider at least $80,000.” The client did not authorize the lawyer to accept any settlement. During mediation, the supplier offers $95,000, dismissal of the action, and a provision prohibiting both parties from disclosing the allegations or settlement. The offer expires the next afternoon. The lawyer believes the client may dislike confidentiality because the client previously wanted a public retraction, but the lawyer also knows that continued litigation will be expensive and uncertain. Which of the following is the most appropriate next step?

Accepted Answer

Explain the offer's financial and confidentiality terms, discuss their practical consequences, and obtain the client's decision before responding.

Answer

Reject the offer immediately because accepting any confidentiality term would conflict with the client's stated desire for public vindication.

Answer

Accept the offer immediately because it exceeds the client's minimum amount and therefore falls within the lawyer's implied settlement authority.

Answer

Tell opposing counsel that the amount is acceptable but the lawyer will independently decide whether confidentiality serves the client's interests.

Question 6

A junior lawyer is researching whether a former employee's customer list qualifies as confidential information under the law of the controlling jurisdiction. The lawyer finds an eight-year-old decision from the jurisdiction's highest court that broadly protects customer lists. A citator marks the decision as questioned because a decision issued two years ago by the same court distinguished it and adopted a narrower, fact-specific approach. The newer decision appears less favorable to the client, but its facts differ from the client's matter. The supervising attorney needs an objective assessment this afternoon and asks the junior lawyer to verify the governing rule before drafting. What is the most appropriate next step?

Accepted Answer

Read the later controlling decision and update the analysis to account for how it limits the earlier case.

Answer

Rely on the earlier decision because it addresses facts more similar to the client's dispute.

Answer

Rely on the earlier decision unless the later court expressly states that the earlier decision is overruled.

Answer

Expand the search to trial-court decisions before reviewing the later controlling decision.

Legal Writing and Drafting — MCQs

Legal Writing and Drafting — MCQs

On this page

Practice by Chapter

Want unlimited practice?