VIPLSATCracking LSAT makes you a VIP.

Logical Reasoning · Principle

PrepTest 147 · Section 4 · Question 13

Phase 1 (your first ~400 questions): read the guidance, then answer. No clock.

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type
Principle
The one idea it tests
When two people are equally careless, the one whose act actually caused the harm is the one who owes repair.
The basic logic
Name the rule in the stimulus: shared carelessness, damage caused by one person's act, only that person compensates. Then find the choice with every piece: two careless people, harm from one, only that one pays.
Tiny words that decide it
  • “both”
  • “but not”
  • “because”

Playground logic

Frankie and Sharon both left their scooters in Aunt Rosa's path (both careless). Aunt Rosa tripped on Frankie's scooter and a flowerpot broke. So Frankie, not Sharon, helps replant. Same carelessness, but the bill follows the one whose thing did the damage.

Step 2 · The kid story

The Flowerpot Fiasco

Frankie and Sharon were arguing so hard about cartoons that they both dropped their scooters right across Aunt Rosa's garden path. Neither one thought about who might walk by. Aunt Rosa came out carrying a flowerpot, tripped on Frankie's scooter, and crash: dirt everywhere. Sharon pointed. 'Ha! Frankie has to help replant!' Frankie gasped. 'But you left yours there too!' Aunt Rosa brushed off her apron. 'You were both careless, true. But it was Frankie's scooter that tripped me. So Frankie helps me replant this afternoon. Sharon, you got lucky.' Lulu wrote on her clipboard: 'Both careless. One caused the mess. That one fixes it.' Biscuit sniffed the spilled dirt and sneezed.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Frankie and Sharon both carelessly left their scooters across Aunt Rosa's garden path. Aunt Rosa tripped over Frankie's scooter and broke a flowerpot. Because his scooter caused the fall, Frankie, but not Sharon, should help repair the damage.

Which one of the following best fits the principle the situation illustrates?

Choices

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Two Kite Flyers

Two neighbors flew kites near power lines, both ignoring the warning signs. One kite snagged a line and knocked out a bakery's ovens. The bakery sued both. Mr. Whitfield represented the second neighbor. 'Your Honor, my client was just as foolish, I admit it. But his kite never touched a wire. The other kite did.' The judge considered. 'So you say equal carelessness does not mean equal bills?' 'Exactly. The one whose act caused the harm should pay for it.' The judge nodded. 'The first neighbor will pay the bakery. Your client gets a stern lecture and a free pamphlet on kite safety.'

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 147, Section 4, Question 13 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Write the stimulus's rule as a checklist: two people, both careless, harm caused by one person's act, only that person compensates. Test each choice against every box, one at a time. A choice that misses even one box is out. Keep the choice that checks every box, and make sure its outcome points the same way as the stimulus's outcome.