PrepTest 138, Section 2, Question 21
Justine: Pellman, Inc.(76 more words not shown)
The dialogue provides the most(18 more words not shown)
- AIf the lawsuit(16 more words not shown)
- BPellman's corporate leaders(11 more words not shown)
- CIf Pellman's legal(25 more words not shown)
- DIf Pellman's corporate(27 more words not shown)
- EIf Pellman's corporate(21 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Winning could cost more than settling.
Pellman paid $1 million to end the lawsuit. Justine takes that as evidence that the leaders expected to lose. But suppose they expected to win and also expected the trial to cost $3 million in legal fees. Paying $1 million could make sense without conceding that they thought their case was weak.
That's Simon's response. He doesn't claim the leaders expected to win. He says their expectations about winning are unclear, and he offers a cost explanation that works whether they expected victory or defeat.
What we’re looking for
For the disagreement question, stay with what the settlement tells us about the leaders' expectations. Justine thinks it shows they expected a loss. Simon thinks they could have settled even with a favorable view of their chances. The answer needs to capture that difference.
Working the answers
- A
This concerns what would probably have happened in court. The speakers discuss what the leaders expected to happen. Someone can expect a victory and be wrong, or expect a loss and be wrong. Neither speaker settles the actual strength of Pellman's case.
- B
Neither speaker evaluates how accurately the leaders could estimate their chances. Justine draws an inference about the leaders' expectations; Simon questions that inference. Whether the leaders' estimates would have been reliable is a separate issue.
- C
Simon endorses the idea that avoiding larger legal fees can make settlement cost-effective. Justine doesn't reject that general point. She interprets this settlement as indicating an expected loss, but that doesn't establish a disagreement over C's conditional cost comparison.
- D
Neither speaker commits to this prediction. Even if trial fees were lower, leaders expecting a large judgment against the company might still prefer settlement. Justine never discusses that fee comparison, and Simon's account of expensive fees doesn't tell us what would happen with cheaper ones.
- ECorrect
Justine's inference treats an expectation of winning as incompatible with this decision to settle: if they thought they'd win, they wouldn't have paid the settlement. Simon rejects that connection. In his account, they could expect to win and still pay $1 million because the legal fees alone would cost more. That gives us the disagreement without claiming Simon knows they actually expected victory.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.