It is currently Thu Sep 02, 2010 11:41 am
Image

Win a Prep Course, or an iPad, or a Business School Visit of Your Dreams!
Fly in First/Business class from virtually anywhere to wherever on this planet, stay in a Luxury hotel, and take a limo to the airport!

GMAT Club is at a historic milestone of 100,000 members! We are celebrating by giving away 375 prizes worth over $48,000.




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Bookmark and Share Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
TAGS:
  CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 9:46 pm 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008
Posts: 279
Location: Kolkata
Concentration: Strategic Management
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 6 (0), given: 5

GMAT Tests User
         00:00        
In the earliest stages of the common law, a party could have a case heard by a judge only upon the payment of a fee to the court, and then only if the case fit within one of the forms for which there existed a writ. At first the number of such formalized cases of action was very small, but judges invented new forms which brought more cases and greater revenues. Which of the following conclusions is most strongly suggested by the paragraph above?
(A) Early judges often decided cases in an arbitrary and haphazard manner.
(B) In most early cases, the plaintiff rather than the defendant prevailed.
(C) The judiciary at first had greater power than either the legislature or the executive.
(D) One of the motivating forces for the early expansion in judicial power was economic considerations.
(E) The first common law decisions were inconsistent with one another and did not form a coherent body of law.

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
D


Pls explain

_________________
Thanks
rampuria


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:39 pm 
Offline
Manager
Manager

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008
Posts: 243
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 10 (0), given: 0

GMAT Tests User
E. OA?

the question stem says,
case heard by a judge only upon the payment of a fee to the court and then if exists in writ.
Action:
1) first the number of such formalized cases of action was very small.
2)but judges invented new forms which brought more cases and greater revenues.

To conclude this,
one should properly conclude why cases of action is small and how it got increaced.

E explains clearly.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:41 am 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager

Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008
Posts: 351
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 12 (0), given: 2

GMAT Tests User
I agree with the explanation above and think the answer is E.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:07 am 
Offline
Manager
Manager
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009
Posts: 123
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 8 (0), given: 2

I got D , but every one other seems to get E.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:21 am 
Offline
Manager
Manager
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009
Posts: 123
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 8 (0), given: 2

[P1] party could have a case only upon the payment
[P2] if the case fit a writ.
[P3] formalized cases of action was very small
[P4] judges invented new forms
[P5] brought more cases and greater revenues

The above are set of premises and the conclusion should
sum up all the premises.

(A) Early judges often decided cases in an arbitrary and haphazard manner.
arbitrary and haphazard manner ? Does some premise state that. May be
they were organized thats the reason they took the case which had
written writ.

(B) In most early cases, the plaintiff rather than the defendant prevailed.
Not relevent. Trying to distract with external factors.

(C) The judiciary at first had greater power than either the legislature or
the executive.
Not relevent. Trying to distract with external factors.

(D) One of the motivating forces for the early expansion in judicial power was
economic considerations.
Yes , It kind of concludes why "party could have a case only upon the payment",
why "judges invented new forms" , to get in more money.
It seems to be the soul movitation for the expansion in judiciary system.

(E) The first common law decisions were inconsistent with one another and did
not form a coherent body of law.
Inconsistent and Incoherent ?? Which premise states that ? Even if true, doesn't
really conclude anything.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:15 am 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager

Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008
Posts: 334
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 9 (0), given: 3

GMAT Tests User
Is it D??

_________________
"CEO in making"


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:23 am 
Offline
CEO in training
CEO in training
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 18, 2008
Posts: 1599
Followers: 2

Kudos (?): 45 (0), given: 0

GMAT Tests User
My choice is D


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:43 am 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008
Posts: 279
Location: Kolkata
Concentration: Strategic Management
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 6 (0), given: 5

GMAT Tests User
gmatavenue wrote:
[P1] party could have a case only upon the payment
[P2] if the case fit a writ.
[P3] formalized cases of action was very small
[P4] judges invented new forms
[P5] brought more cases and greater revenues

The above are set of premises and the conclusion should
sum up all the premises.

(A) Early judges often decided cases in an arbitrary and haphazard manner.
arbitrary and haphazard manner ? Does some premise state that. May be
they were organized thats the reason they took the case which had
written writ.

(B) In most early cases, the plaintiff rather than the defendant prevailed.
Not relevent. Trying to distract with external factors.

(C) The judiciary at first had greater power than either the legislature or
the executive.
Not relevent. Trying to distract with external factors.

(D) One of the motivating forces for the early expansion in judicial power was
economic considerations.
Yes , It kind of concludes why "party could have a case only upon the payment",
why "judges invented new forms" , to get in more money.
It seems to be the soul movitation for the expansion in judiciary system.

(E) The first common law decisions were inconsistent with one another and did
not form a coherent body of law.
Inconsistent and Incoherent ?? Which premise states that ? Even if true, doesn't
really conclude anything.



Does'nt D have a cause and effect problem. The expansion lead to increased revenues, not the other war around. It is possible that the judges took the initiative to expand the scope of the judiciary for the betterment of citizens, not for economic consideration.

RITULA HELP ME ON THIS.

_________________
Thanks
rampuria


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:13 am 
Offline
Manager
Manager
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009
Posts: 123
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 8 (0), given: 2

Could you pl elaborate the cause --> effect problem you see in D. Thanks.
Specially in a conclusion question.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:22 am 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008
Posts: 279
Location: Kolkata
Concentration: Strategic Management
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 6 (0), given: 5

GMAT Tests User
gmatavenue wrote:
Could you pl elaborate the cause --> effect problem you see in D. Thanks.
Specially in a conclusion question.



What I am trying to ask is how we can conclude that the economic consideration motivated the judges to expand the scope of cases. It could be that the expansion drives of the judges lead to generation of money. The judges could have been paying least attention to the revenues.

Are you getting what I am trying to say?

_________________
Thanks
rampuria


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:08 am 
Offline
Manager
Manager
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009
Posts: 123
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 8 (0), given: 2

[P1] party could have a case only upon the payment
[P2] if the case fit a writ.
[P3] formalized cases of action was very small
[P4] judges invented new forms
[P5] brought more cases and greater revenues

A careful reading will surely get you [P1] , where it is clear that money was the motive.

So I really cannot decipher your query.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:29 am 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 26, 2008
Posts: 453
Concentration: Strategy, International Business, Finance
Schools: Kellogg Class of 2012
Followers: 1

Kudos (?): 48 (0), given: 4

GMAT Tests User
I agree with D

I don't see any cause and effect problem. It states that economic considerations was 'one of the motivating factors'

Cheers,
Unplugged


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:55 am 
Offline
CEO in training
CEO in training
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 18, 2008
Posts: 1599
Followers: 2

Kudos (?): 45 (0), given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Rampuria, even if we ignore for a while the casue and effect case, we can easily eliminate other choices as all others are out of scope.
for ex no where is it mentioned or implied that early judges decided cases in arbitrary or haphazard manner.hence A is out.
Similarly other choices are also outr of scope. Now coming to D, since it is mentioned in the argument that cases could be persued only after payment of fees. Jugdes invented new forms which brought new cases and hence more revenues. So it is quite possible that the motive of judges behind bringing more cases was money.

rampuria wrote:
gmatavenue wrote:
[P1] party could have a case only upon the payment
[P2] if the case fit a writ.
[P3] formalized cases of action was very small
[P4] judges invented new forms
[P5] brought more cases and greater revenues

The above are set of premises and the conclusion should
sum up all the premises.

(A) Early judges often decided cases in an arbitrary and haphazard manner.
arbitrary and haphazard manner ? Does some premise state that. May be
they were organized thats the reason they took the case which had
written writ.

(B) In most early cases, the plaintiff rather than the defendant prevailed.
Not relevent. Trying to distract with external factors.

(C) The judiciary at first had greater power than either the legislature or
the executive.
Not relevent. Trying to distract with external factors.

(D) One of the motivating forces for the early expansion in judicial power was
economic considerations.
Yes , It kind of concludes why "party could have a case only upon the payment",
why "judges invented new forms" , to get in more money.
It seems to be the soul movitation for the expansion in judiciary system.

(E) The first common law decisions were inconsistent with one another and did
not form a coherent body of law.
Inconsistent and Incoherent ?? Which premise states that ? Even if true, doesn't
really conclude anything.



Does'nt D have a cause and effect problem. The expansion lead to increased revenues, not the other war around. It is possible that the judges took the initiative to expand the scope of the judiciary for the betterment of citizens, not for economic consideration.

RITULA HELP ME ON THIS.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 1:13 pm 
Offline
Math & Verbal GMAT Forum Moderator
Math & Verbal GMAT Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008
Posts: 1582
Followers: 5

Kudos (?): 109 (0), given: 1

GMAT Tests User
To me, E was never a contender. No way we can make a conclusion that the first decsions were incoherent and inconsistent compared to the latter decisions. I chose D.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:08 pm 
Offline
Major Shareholder
Major Shareholder

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008
Posts: 896
Followers: 1

Kudos (?): 18 (0), given: 95

GMAT Tests User
IMO D.


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:47 pm 
Offline
Major Shareholder
Major Shareholder

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008
Posts: 731
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 6 (0), given: 2

GMAT Tests User
IMO D...wht is the OA?


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:34 pm 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008
Posts: 279
Location: Kolkata
Concentration: Strategic Management
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 6 (0), given: 5

GMAT Tests User
od is d

_________________
Thanks
rampuria


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:04 am 
Offline
Manager
Manager

Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008
Posts: 103
Followers: 1

Kudos (?): 35 (0), given: 0

Where the HELL did this question come from? If it is a real GMAT or LSAT question, I'll have a cow.

All the answers except (D) are clearly wrong: There is no information in the paragraph that remotely supports any of them. The problem with (D) is close to what rampuria points out, but not quite. The paragraph actually DOES state a cause-and-effect relationship: Increasing the number of forms led to greater revenue. The problem is that choice (D) says that the desire for more revenue was the MOTIVATION for increasing the number of forms, which is a totally different statement.

The presence of cause and effect does not prove motivation. For instance, it is a fact that prohibition of drugs CAUSES organized crime to become very rich and powerful. We cannot conclude from this that every politician who supports prohibition is MOTIVATED by wanting to make organized crime very rich and powerful.

There is nothing in the paragraph that gives us any information, one way or the other, about the judges' MOTIVATION. Thus, we cannot logically prove that they did it FOR THE PURPOSE of improving their economic situation. Sure, it is highly likely in the real world -- but that is not enough to make it a proper GMAT or LSAT inference.


UPDATE: Not having a cow. rampuria advised me privately that this is an Arco question. My faith in GMAC remains strong.

_________________
Grumpy

Kaplan teacher and tutor


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:45 pm 
Offline
Intern
Intern

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009
Posts: 40
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Concentration: Finance
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 0 (0), given: 2

My choice is D


  Profile  
 
  Re: CR-Judges [#permalink]
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 7:56 pm 
Offline
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009
Posts: 358
Affiliations: PMP
Followers: 0

Kudos (?): 49 (0), given: 37

GMAT Tests User
All I see in the question stimulus is fee and revenue and D talks about economic considerations and all others are totally un-related, so D is the answer based on elimination; if there was a "none of the above" that would've been the answer :)

_________________
Thanks, Sri
-------------------------------
keep uppp...ing the tempo...

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip


  Profile  
 
Online
gmatclubot
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


Search for:
Jump to:




GMAT Club MBA Forum Home | Sitemap | About | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | GMAT Club Rules | Contact
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group and phpBB SEO
Kindly note that GMAT (C) is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC.