PLECK lesson 88 · suggested week 18, day
Spiral lab 9: facts,rules and changed conditions
Objective. Retrieve and compare six supplied scenarios from current and earlier units.
This is class practice, not legal advice. Do not file a real form, contact a court, or enter a real person’s legal information. A typed answer or paper is enough. Optional audio or video is a private file up to 4 MB.
About undefined minutes. The due date is chosen by a parent.
Materials: Paper or a text editor, Pencil or pen, Optional printer, Optional private recorder;equivalent text/in-person alternative always available, Supplied source cards;internet optional.
Spaced practice 9 connects current concepts with earlier reasoning. Try recalling the distinction before rereading the printed principle; then revise using it. Retrieval is practice, not a memory contest. Explain why the changed fact matters rather than only changing the answer. Current unit context: A tort is a civil wrong recognized by law, distinct from a criminal prosecution and from a contractual promise. A negligence model asks about duty, breach, causation and legally recognized harm; causation includes factual and legal limits. These categories organize analysis but do not create a universal liability formula. Intentional torts and defenses have their own elements. A single event can raise more than one area of law, yet proving one claim does not automatically prove another. Classroom incidents are non-graphic and fictional, and no learner must recreate a hazard. For each task, the complete principle, original record and changed fact appear in the question. No earlier assignment or outside website is needed. Method: First identify the actor and issue. Read the supplied principle as a limited model or overview, not a universal rule. Mark agreed facts, allegations and unknowns. Link a fact to each relevant condition. Consider a different interpretation and state a conditional conclusion when authority or facts are incomplete. Your reasons matter more than choosing a side. Use only the fictional record; no real case, private document or external contact is needed. Safety: Legal education only, not individualized legal advice. All disputes and records are fictional classroom simulations. Do not file, pay, contact police/courts/parties, visit a courthouse, investigate a real person, or disclose private family/case information. Use supplied facts; personal disclosure is never required. Written or private in-person alternatives replace every recording activity.
US foundations with Texas examples;federal procedure/evidence illustrations are not instructions for Texas filings. Supplied classroom rules are not invented statutes. Educational exercise only. This is not legal advice, a filing, or a result for a real person.
Worked example
A fictional store uses a safe dry shelf and follows the supplied reasonable-care standard, yet an unforeseeable event damages a package. The damage alone does not prove unreasonable conduct. Breach compares conduct with the applicable standard; causation and legally recognized harm are additional questions, not replacements for that comparison.
Spiral lab 9: facts,rules and changed conditions — reasoning record
- 1. Retrieval connection from unit 9, Tort, contract and crime can overlap: Principle: Classify a claim by its legal basis and remedy, not just the seriousness of a story. Contract duties arise from an agreement; tort duties can arise independently; government prosecutes crimes. One event can create separate questions with different elements and burdens. Record: An adult repair shop allegedly damages a borrowed tablet and also fails its promised repair service. Change: No repair agreement existed, but a person allegedly damaged the tablet through carelessness. Without inventing facts, name the central distinction, and explain one before/after difference. Then explain why an unsupported universal conclusion would be unsafe.
- 2. Retrieval connection from unit 9, Factual cause and legal limits: Principle: Factual causation asks whether conduct contributed in the legally required way; proximate-cause analysis limits responsibility through applicable legal standards such as foreseeability. Sequence alone is not causation. Do not assume every later event is legally attributable to the first actor. Record: A model exhibit falls after a loose stand is bumped. A separate bag across the room is damaged later by an unrelated spill. Change: Evidence shows the bump directly knocked the liquid container onto the bag. Without inventing facts, name the central distinction, and explain one before/after difference. Then explain why an unsupported universal conclusion would be unsafe.
- 3. Retrieval connection from unit 8, Acceptance and changed terms: Principle: Acceptance must be analyzed under applicable law and the offer’s terms. A response proposing a different deal may be negotiation rather than an acceptance; goods transactions can have special rules. Avoid importing one simplified common-law model into every transaction. Record: Under a stated classroom exact-terms model, an adult offers a painting service for 100. The response says I agree only if you also paint the fence. Change: The response simply agrees to the stated service and price using the requested method. Without inventing facts, name the central distinction, and explain one before/after difference. Then explain why an unsupported universal conclusion would be unsafe.
- 4. Retrieval connection from unit 8, Writing, clarity and incorporated terms: Principle: Some agreements must satisfy writing requirements; others can be enforceable without a formal document. Writing helps clarify obligations but does not eliminate ambiguity, invalid terms or missing assent. Identify subject, performance, timing and remedy language before assuming a document answers every question. Record: A fictional service note says Finish soon for a fair price and supplies no definition or context. Change: A revised note supplies the scope, date and a stated price accepted by both adults. Without inventing facts, name the central distinction, and explain one before/after difference. Then explain why an unsupported universal conclusion would be unsafe.
- 5. Retrieval connection from unit 6, Probable cause is not conviction: Principle: Different decisions require different evidentiary showings. A preliminary basis for investigation or legal process is not the same as proof beyond a reasonable doubt at trial. Never express the criminal trial standard as a fixed numerical percentage. Record: A fictional news report says a charge proves guilt because a preliminary hearing occurred. Change: A trial later ends in acquittal. Without inventing facts, name the central distinction, and explain one before/after difference. Then explain why an unsupported universal conclusion would be unsafe.
- 6. Retrieval connection from unit 1, Primary and secondary authority: Principle: Primary sources contain law made by authorized institutions. Secondary sources explain or analyze law and can help locate primary material. A summary’s confidence or popularity does not make it binding, and an introduced bill is not necessarily enacted law. Record: A blog summarizes a proposed bicycle bill as if it were already a Texas statute. The bill page says introduced. Change: The blog links to an enacted version with a future effective date. Without inventing facts, name the central distinction, and explain one before/after difference. Then explain why an unsupported universal conclusion would be unsafe.
Acceptance checks
- Respond to each numbered task with the required chart,calculation,explanation or script.
- For case-application tasks,connect the supplied principle to specific fictional facts and mark unknowns. For principle-only or source-card tasks,follow their stated scope;no extra case application is required.
- Keep personal information out of submissions and never send,file,pay or contact anyone for the exercise.
- Text,paper and private oral alternatives are evaluated for the same reasoning;no automatic passing policy is assigned.
A student may explain aloud to a parent. Submit typed numbered responses; or handwritten photo; or a printed page scanned as image/PDF; or a parent-paper completion log with the actual paper retained. Optional private audio/video may replace written explanation if each numbered task is identified. Each image/PDF/audio/video file must be at most 4 MiB and pass the app’s type/signature checks; use short clips or an equally detailed written script instead of a large file. An HTTPS reference may be stored as text only: it is not opened or evaluated automatically. Do not submit ZIP/code files or private records.
If this is still shaky. Read aloud or break the principle into conditions. A parent may scribe the learner’s reasoning. Retry the guided task before revising the original. Optional guided retry for Spiral lab 9: facts,rules and changed conditions: A stipulated reasonable-care model concerns storing fragile boxes. The shop stacks heavy boxes on a clearly marked fragile package despite an available safe shelf. Read this principle: Where a duty exists, breach asks whether conduct fell below the applicable standard. Reasonable care is not a guarantee that no accident occurs. Identify foreseeable risk and feasible precautions without using hindsight alone. Make two boxes:one supplied fact and one legal condition. Draw an arrow explaining their connection. State one thing the record does not establish.
Optional extra. Extend the reasoning,not the real-world risk;all added records remain clearly fictional. Optional transfer challenge for Spiral lab 9: facts,rules and changed conditions: Original: A stipulated reasonable-care model concerns storing fragile boxes. The shop stacks heavy boxes on a clearly marked fragile package despite an available safe shelf. Changed fact: The box was safely stored but damaged by an unforeseeable event not caused by the shop. Write a two-column before/after analysis. Identify exactly what changed and what legal question remains. Suggest one fictional additional record that could clarify a genuinely missing fact,or explain why no additional fact is needed under a stipulated model. Do not create a real record,contact anyone or invent authority.
Turn in a typed answer, a JPEG, PNG, or WebP photo, a PDF scan, or an MP3, WAV, M4A, MP4, or WebM file up to 4 MB. A parent can log paper. One https address is stored as text and is not opened or run. Zip and code files are refused.
- Cornell LII/Wex: Negligence
Jurisdiction/scope: US academic secondary overview; state law varies Source type: academic-secondary-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: Duty, breach, cause-in-fact, proximate cause and harm. Four-part classroom model combines causal components; not an automatic liability formula. Supplied offline source card Title: Cornell LII/Wex: Negligence Exact URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/negligence Jurisdiction/scope: US academic secondary overview; state law varies Source type: academic-secondary-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: Duty, breach, cause-in-fact, proximate cause and harm. Four-part classroom model combines causal components; not an automatic liability formula. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson. - US Courts: Civil Cases
Jurisdiction/scope: US federal judiciary official overview Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: Complaint, service, discovery, settlement, trial and typical preponderance standard; not a Texas procedural manual. Supplied offline source card Title: US Courts: Civil Cases Exact URL: https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/types-cases/civil-cases Jurisdiction/scope: US federal judiciary official overview Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: Complaint, service, discovery, settlement, trial and typical preponderance standard; not a Texas procedural manual. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson. - Texas State Law Library: Legal Research for Beginners
Jurisdiction/scope: Texas official public-library guidance Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: Distinguishes primary law from explanatory secondary sources. Free public guide; account-only databases/books not required. Supplied offline source card Title: Texas State Law Library: Legal Research for Beginners Exact URL: https://guides.sll.texas.gov/legal-research-for-beginners Jurisdiction/scope: Texas official public-library guidance Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: Distinguishes primary law from explanatory secondary sources. Free public guide; account-only databases/books not required. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson. - Cornell LII/Wex: Contract
Jurisdiction/scope: US academic secondary overview; state law varies Source type: academic-secondary-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: Mutual assent, consideration, capacity, legality and remedies. Academic explanatory source, not Texas binding authority. Supplied offline source card Title: Cornell LII/Wex: Contract Exact URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/contracts Jurisdiction/scope: US academic secondary overview; state law varies Source type: academic-secondary-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: Mutual assent, consideration, capacity, legality and remedies. Academic explanatory source, not Texas binding authority. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson. - Texas Attorney General: Consumer Protection
Jurisdiction/scope: Texas official agency overview Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: Education, complaints and public-interest civil enforcement; agency information is not private representation. Supplied offline source card Title: Texas Attorney General: Consumer Protection Exact URL: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/consumer-protection Jurisdiction/scope: Texas official agency overview Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: Education, complaints and public-interest civil enforcement; agency information is not private representation. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson. - US Courts: Criminal Cases
Jurisdiction/scope: US federal judiciary official overview Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: Government prosecution; burden beyond reasonable doubt; counsel and adjudication stages. No real reporting activity is assigned. Supplied offline source card Title: US Courts: Criminal Cases Exact URL: https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/types-cases/criminal-cases Jurisdiction/scope: US federal judiciary official overview Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: Government prosecution; burden beyond reasonable doubt; counsel and adjudication stages. No real reporting activity is assigned. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson. - National Archives: Bill of Rights
Jurisdiction/scope: US federal primary constitutional text Source type: official-primary-constitutional-text Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: First ten amendments; ratified 1791. Scope and later interpretation matter. Supplied offline source card Title: National Archives: Bill of Rights Exact URL: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript Jurisdiction/scope: US federal primary constitutional text Source type: official-primary-constitutional-text Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: First ten amendments; ratified 1791. Scope and later interpretation matter. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson. - Texas Court of Criminal Appeals: About
Jurisdiction/scope: Texas official judiciary Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 Reading purpose: Explains criminal appellate routing and special direct appeals; course avoids death-penalty roleplay. Supplied offline source card Title: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals: About Exact URL: https://www.txcourts.gov/cca/about-the-court/ Jurisdiction/scope: Texas official judiciary Source type: official-government-explanatory-overview Verified: 2026-11-07 (America/Chicago CST; dated reading, not an ongoing guarantee) Reading purpose and limits: Explains criminal appellate routing and special direct appeals; course avoids death-penalty roleplay. Outside browsing is supplemental. Use this printed metadata and the lesson’s original principle to complete the exercise offline. The complete card metadata,purpose and limits are printed here and in every workbook. No external page is needed to complete a source-card exercise.
· Opening this link does not submit the lesson.
This is a preview. A parent assigns the lesson and chooses the due date after the student is enrolled. The answer key is not on this page.