Hi there!
I am in search of a study buddy, preferably in the SF Bay Area. My ultimate goal score is a 170 but I would be more than happy to settle for a 165. My average score is 157 with my highest score being a 160 and lowest being a 155. I would love to find someone who has been scoring similarly so that we can hold each other accountable to study and discuss missed questions to reinforce the logic.
A bit about me, I work as a paralegal in immigration law. I plan on pursuing a Masters in Human Rights and Democratization in Europe before starting law school but I want to take the LSAT now since LG is my best section. My dream school is UT Austin and I have already decided to apply ED.
Please let me know if you would be interested in studying together. :)
I picked D when I took the practice test. The reason why D is wrong is mentioned briefly by JY and I see it clearly now.
My flawed reasoning:
All landowners whose sidewalks haven't been cleared will received citations which will result in fines unless there are extenuating circumstances. Therefore nearly all landowners who haven't cleared their sidewalks will receive fines.
The reason why it's wrong:
This mistakenly conflates all landowners who haven't cleared their sidewalks with all landowners whose sidewalks haven't been cleared. So tricky how these are two different groups based on a little change of wording. It could be that the city cleared all the sidewalks and they were billed for it so no land owners who haven't cleared their sidewalks receive fines.