PrepTest 142, Section 1, Question 24
Any driver involved in an accident leading to(44 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AIf Ted is(16 more words not shown)
- BIf Ted's car(23 more words not shown)
- CSomeone other than(14 more words not shown)
- DIf Ted is(18 more words not shown)
- EEither no one(16 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Ted might be exempt even after a very serious accident.
The rule requires a report when an accident involves personal injury or more than $500 in property damage, but it makes an exception for a driver who cannot report it. Picture a driver in a coma after a crash causing extensive damage. The damage threshold is met, yet the exception can still apply.
What we’re looking for
So Ted's lack of an obligation doesn't tell us the accident was minor. Perhaps neither trigger occurred; perhaps Ted is incapable of reporting. For the inference question, keep both possibilities open. If an answer establishes that a trigger did occur, then the exception must explain why Ted isn't required to report.
Working the answers
- A
Incapacity doesn't put a limit on the damage. Ted could be incapable of reporting after a crash causing thousands of dollars in damage. The exception concerns his ability to report, not whether the accident crossed the financial threshold.
- BCorrect
More than $500 in damage to Ted's car would satisfy the property-damage trigger. An involved driver would then be required to report unless incapable of doing so. We already know Ted isn't required, so if that damage occurred, he must qualify for the incapacity exception. Otherwise the two statements would conflict.
- C
The rule doesn't transfer an incapable driver's obligation to another person. It also doesn't establish that this accident triggered any reporting requirement in the first place. C adds a duty for someone else that the passage never gives us.
- D
Incapacity needn't have been caused by an injury in this accident. It could arise from some separate condition or event. The rule gives an exception based on ability, without specifying why the driver lacks that ability. We can't infer this particular cause.
- E
Both personal injury and damage exceeding $500 could have occurred while Ted remained exempt because he was incapable of reporting. The coma example shows how that could happen. E rules out the combination of both triggers but ignores the exception that can apply even when both are present.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.