QUESTION TYPE: Principle – Conform
- Both Emma and John ignored the risk.
- John is the one who actually caused damage.
- Therefore, John is the only one who should be required to compensate the neighbor.
ANALYSIS: This situation establishes that both Emma and John were doing something risky, but only John actually caused a problem. Therefore John is the one who must pay.
So, the principle is that “only the one who causes damage must pay, even if other people were running the same risk.” You should also look for a situation with at least two people running risks.
- There’s only one person here, no harm was done, and no compensation was ordered. This is not at all similar.
- There’s no fault here, and no compensation owed from Linda or Seung!
- CORRECT. This matches. Both Terry and Chris were running a risk. But only Chris has to pay, since Chris is the only one who caused damage.
- Alexis and Juan didn’t know they were causing a risk, and neither of them caused damage. To parallel, one of them should have caused damage and paid someone.
- This is the closest wrong answer. If Susan had caused damage and had to pay someone, it would match. But “not being able to hold someone responsible for your injury” isn’t exactly what happened in the stimulus.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly