PrepTest 117

[lcid:3564] Prep Test 117 LSAT — Reading Comp — S1 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-7  .        The Canadian Auto Workers' (CAW) Legal  . Services Plan, designed to give active and retired  . Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal Studies


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • New plan introduced; Adoption
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • New plan - CAW Prepaid legal services - Join plan, then pay lower legal fees (or free)
    • Options/Distinction - Plan lawyer (free), cooperating lawyer (free or fee), outside lawyer (fee + balance)
    • 45% eligible signed up; department store adopted plan

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Lawyers vs. Plan Directors
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Lawyers - Bad for profession; drives down overall fees in cities where it operates
    • Directors - Increase professional contact and referrals (3-4 per client that gets good service)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author - Unlikely the plans will be good for lawyers or clients
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Established lawyers won’t sign up → Marketing for new lawyers → Clients get inexperienced lawyers → Clients less satisfied
    • Downward pressure on fees → Referrals won’t make up difference → Lawyers spend less time per case → Clients less satisfied

Main Point: While the CAW’s prepaid plan members appear happy with the service and the directors argue it’ll be good for lawyers and clients, in reality, the increased use of such plans won’t result in long-term client satisfaction or increased profits for law firms, as its directors argue.

Key Lines?

Lines 1-12 - The new plan is outlined

Lines 14-15 - People like it

Lines 20-22 - Lawyers criticize the plan

Lines 29-33 - Plan directors rebut that criticism

Lines 38-40 - The Author says the plan is bad

Meta-Structure?

Old Approach/New Approach - The entire passage is designed around describing (Paragraph 1), explaining the debate around (Paragraph 2), and reaching a final determination on (Paragraph 3) a new approach to legal services. The old approach to legal services saw each person individually hiring lawyers, the new prepaid plans have people enroll in a service that gives them no- or low-price legal services from lawyers who sign up for the plan. When a passage falls into the Old Approach/New Approach, the Author’s opinion of the new approach generally serves as the main point of the passage. Here, the Author’s opinion is stated in Paragraph 3 - she’s not a fan of them, believing that they won’t result in long-term client satisfaction or increased profits from law firms. In short, no one (except maybe the plan directors who are running the plan) will likely be happy with it over the long term. The main point should reflect that opinion.

Causality - Paragraph 3 sees the Author presenting a few causal chains to explain why she doesn’t believe the prepaid legal plans will result in positive outcomes for either clients or lawyers.

Last Thoughts?

This passage is relatively straight-forward as far as the content and structure is concerned, so let’s work to get through the questions quickly and free up some time for a harder passage later in the section.

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Review our paragraph role notes, then find an answer that aligns with them

Answer Anticipation

We spend a few seconds after each paragraph jotting down a few words on the role that paragraph played in the Author’s argument. That helps us to track the development of the argument through the passage, find relevant information for questions and answers, and, occasionally, directly answer these questions about the passage’s overall structure and organization.So for them, we should already have the work done! Let’s review what we said about each paragraph, then find an answer that lines up with it. We’ll then dive into the passage if we need to confirm any details:Paragraph 1 - New plan introduced; AdoptionParagraph 2 - Lawyers vs. Plan DirectorsParagraph 3 - Author - Unlikely the plans will be good for lawyers or clients

Answer choices

  1. A
    a description of a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) The first two parts of this answer aren’t great, but they’re also not enough to rule it out. The new plan could be described as a set of procedures and policies, and there is a summary of at least some of the results (45% adoption; many plan members are happy; legal services fees have gone down). However, this answer fails to bring up the debate in Paragraph 2, and the Author doesn’t offer refinements of the plan in Paragraph 3, so this answer is incorrect.

  2. B
    an evaluation of a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) The first paragraph is more of a description of the new legal plan rather than an evaluation of it, which suggests an opinion is stated. There also isn’t really a comparison with related past phenomena. And, finally, the author doesn’t approve of the new plan. This answer is more or less completely wrong!

  3. C
    a presentation of a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) The Legal Service Plan has been implemented, so it’s not a proposal with prospects for implementation! That said, the Author does reject the plan, but, again, it’s not a proposal. This answer therefore has fundamental issues that make it wrong.

  4. D
    a description of an Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem

    (D) Paragraph 1 details the Legal Services Plan, which can be characterized as an innovation in how legal services are paid for. Paragraph 2 presents arguments against the plan from lawyers and in favor of it by the plan’s directors, so the second part of this answer is correct. And Paragraph 3 is the Author’s opinion on it. While the last part doesn’t state whether the Author’s argumentation is in favor or against the plan, it is correct to characterize that sentence as the Author’s argumentation concerning it, so this answer is correct.

  5. E
    an explanation of a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) A new legal services plan isn’t really an occurrence, but let’s say that it is for argument’s sake. The practical value is debated in Paragraph 2, but it’s not until Paragraph 3 that the Author makes an evaluation of the plan’s practical value, and she doesn’t present further data regarding it, so this answer is incorrect.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion