PT124.S4.P2.Q7

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

This doesn’t capture Goodrich’s solution described in the last paragraph. The main point isn’t that the influence of common law can explain certain terminology and subject matter divisions. It’s that Goodrich has a solution for the lack of attention given to common law’s history during the academic study of law.

This doesn’t capture Goodrich’s solution described in the last paragraph. Also, the author never suggests that theoretical interpretations have conflicted with political interpretations. The author mentions the theoretical and political reasons that the study of law has treated law as a coherent whole. But she never suggests that there’s a conflict between the theoretical and the political.

This misdescribes Goodrich’s view. Goodrich doesn’t advocate for treating common law as “system of rules.”

This doesn’t capture Goodrich’s solution described in the last paragraph. The main point isn’t about the lack of fairness of common law. It’s that Goodrich has a solution for the lack of attention given to common law’s history during the academic study of law.