How are suspected colonies of anaerobes processed?  

In August 2025, the Illinois General Services Administration (GSA) announced a new Rideshare Agreement with Uber for Government (Uber). This partnership makes rideshare services available to all state government employees anywhere in Illinois. GSA believed the collaboration would help to simplify operations and reduce inefficiencies for employees who have to travel for work, and hoped the program would reduce crime in urban areas known for car theft and late-night assaults and robberies. GSA was particularly concerned with making women feel safe. In December 2025, GSA and Uber released a unique app with innovative safety features and policies for women users. These features include giving women the option to be matched with other women on trips. When requesting a trip, female riders can choose female drivers, and can specify a preference to ride with another female rider. The app will also guide a female rider to a pick-up location where other women also need a ride. And a special feature, Follow My Ride, allows friends and family to follow trips in real time, so female riders and their families can feel safe. Male riders are still able to request trips and be matched with both men and women, and male drivers continue to be able to accept any trip they are offered. Several male drivers and riders have filed a lawsuit in state court against GSA and Uber, claiming the new program disadvantages them by limiting their income and job opportunities, and by reinforcing stereotypes. What claims can the male drivers reasonably make, and what is the likely outcome? Discuss.

On Form 941, dollar signs and decimal points are allowed.

Pippa was an elite cross-country skier. On August 31, she registered to compete in the Regional U.S. Olympic Ski Team Qualifier race (“Regionals”). Regionals would be held on January 1. The top seven finishers at Regionals would earn an automatic spot on the U.S. Winter Olympic Ski Team. When she registered for Regionals, Pippa ranked 5th. If she could hold her place, she would receive a $10,000 team stipend and, more importantly, qualify for the Olympic Team. Pippa was in preliminary discussions with Powderade, a sports drink company seeking a brand ambassador, about a potential $30,000 annual sponsorship contract contingent on Pippa’s selection for the Olympic Team. On September 1, Pippa hired Duncan, a ski coach who was well-known for training future Olympians, to prepare her for Regionals. They agreed that Duncan would design and supervise Pippa’s training and nutrition program for 4 months (up to the competition day). Pippa agreed to pay Duncan $20,000 total: an $8,000 initial payment at the start of training, with the remaining $12,000 due on the day of the competition. Pippa told Duncan about the ongoing sponsorship discussions with Powderade, and Duncan said he guaranteed that his training would get Pippa a place in the top seven at Regionals and earn selection for the U.S. Ski Team. Excited, Pippa booked her air fare ($350) and hotel ($450) for her travel to the competition. Per Duncan’s request, she also bought higher quality wax for her skis before they started training, which cost $200. Duncan’s training regimen was unusual. The more Pippa followed his directions, the slower her skiing became. Duncan assured her that this was typical for skiers he trained and that by mid-November Pippa’s speed would steadily increase until she surpassed her former times. But on November 1—exactly the midpoint of the 4-month program—Duncan abruptly informed Pippa that he was terminating the coaching relationship immediately, as he had been offered a higher-paying contract with another athlete. Pippa called Duncan on the phone and demanded that he finish the program, saying that she would otherwise sue for breach of contract and expose his training regimen in open court. Duncan replied that her exposure would greatly harm his reputation and offered to pay Pippa $10,000 cash to avoid the lawsuit but declined to continue coaching her. Pippa hung up. Pippa was panicked but promptly began searching for a replacement coach. The only available qualified ski coach in her region, Coach Rivera, charged $20,000 for the remaining 2 months of preparation. Pippa hired Coach Rivera immediately and trained with her until competition day. As her speed did not improve, Pippa began suffering panic attacks and lost sleep. Despite completing her preparation with Coach Rivera, Pippa finished in 19th place at Regionals and did not earn a U.S. Ski Team spot. Powderade subsequently declined to offer Pippa the sponsorship contract.   Assume the coaching contract between Pippa and Duncan is valid. Assume Duncan’s unilaterally terminating the coaching relationship was a breach. Do not discuss formation or breach. Question 1: If Pippa sues Duncan for breach of the coaching contract, what damages are available to her (if any), and how would they be limited? Discuss. (90 points.) Question 2: Suppose that rather than hanging up, Pippa accepted Duncan’s settlement agreement over the phone. Duncan nevertheless now argues that he does not have to pay her because the settlement agreement is extortionate. Is he right? Briefly discuss. (10 points.)

Donald owns a professional quality drum set.  Donald purchased it thinking that one day he would learn to play the drums and be the next Ringo Starr.  He never did.  The drums just gathered dust in the corner of his music room.  Donald decided to sell his drum set and listed it on social media. Peter sees the ad and is interested because he is a struggling professional drummer.  He has a cheap drum set but he believes a professional drum set may take his drumming to the next level.  He believes that if he gets this set, he may be asked to be the drummer of a very popular, local 80s cover band known as “Flockin’ Seagulls.”  This will increase his income a lot over the next year. Donald is offering to sell the drum set $1,500.  The drum set was purchased new for $2,500.  It has never been used – not even a single beat.  Peter offers to buy the drum set for $750.  He specifically tells Donald that he hopes to become the drummer for “Flockin’ Seagulls.”  Donald accepts the offer and Peter makes a $100 down payment.  However, because the transaction occurred on social media, they need to determine how Peter will get it because Peter does not have a vehicle (he is a broke musician, after all).  Donald agrees to drive it to Peter for an additional $100.  Donald agrees to deliver the drum set in 15 days.  They write a brief contract with the above terms and the following: “If Donald does not deliver the drum set within 15 days of the signing of this contract, Donald promises to pay Peter $500.”  After the contract is signed, Peter is so excited, he goes out and leases a new van to transport his beautiful new drum set.  A few days after the contract is signed, Donald sells the drum set to the current drummer of Flockin’ Seagulls for $2,000.   Peter learns of the breach of contract and rescinds the lease of his van for the loss of the down payment ($500) and an additional $500 penalty. Peter sues Donald for breach of contract.  What legal remedies may apply and which remedy is most beneficial for Peter?

Which of the following clinical signs is LEAST likely to be present on your motor examination of a patient a lesion affecting the upper motor neurons? 

Palau is a personal shopper. People call Palau with a list of things they want. Palau finds them, buys them, and delivers them in exchange for full re-imbursement, milage fees, and a compensation based of a percentage of the value of the purchased items – usually 15%. Palau’s business was irregular. Some days he made $500, some days Palau made nothing. On average, his net profit was $250 per day. Palau had an old land Rover he was using for his work, but it had a significant breakdown. Palau took the Land Rover to Dietrick’s Land Rover, a car dealership with a repair garage. Dietrick examined the vehicle and said he thought his repairmen could fix it. Dietrick asked Palau to leave the Land Rover with him so he could examine it more fully and put together an estimate. Palau said that was OK, but he hoped Deitrick would hurry because he needed the Land Rover for his personal shopper business. Dietrick said, “I can get you the estimate by tomorrow. We will not know how long repairs will take until we can take the vehicle apart and see what new parts we need.” Palau said “please hurry. I am losing money every day.” Palau came back in the next day around noon. He had to wait an hour to see Dietrick. When he did Dietrick said “My best man called in sick today, and we are busy. Come back tomorrow.” Palau cam back at 1 PM on the third day to try to get an estimate. This time Dietrick provided an estimate sheet that said the car needed new rings, new gaskets, transmission service, and a new water pump. It is estimated to be $1,000 for parts and $2,000 for labor. It was also estimated that it would take four work-days to get the parts and make the repairs. Palau wrote on the estimate “If the vehicle is not finished in five days Deitrick will owe me $200 a day in lost income.” Palau reluctantly signed the estimate and again asked Dietrick to hurry. Deitrick counter signed the estimate and said “don’t worry, we will get it back to you within the five days.” Palau checked back every day. The car was not finished for two more weeks. Palau started renting a car after the first week. The rental cost $100 a day, but was less practical for the deliveries that Palau’s spacious old land Rover. When the car was finished Dietrick said it cost more than the estimate. The final bill was for $2,000 in parts and $4,000 in labor. Palau comes to your law firm and asks what he can recover from Deitrick. You do not need to discuss any defenses or concepts we have not covered so far.

Instructions: Read the fact pattern carefully. Answer the questions using IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion). Assume all events occur in a jurisdiction applying U.S. constitutional criminal procedure. Assume officers are state actors and the exclusionary rule applies in state prosecutions. Fact Pattern Paula rents Apartment 4B and lives there alone. Her cousin, Nora, has been staying with Paula “off and on” for six weeks. Nora keeps a suitcase of clothes under Paula’s bed, has a spare key that Paula gave her, and sometimes stays several nights in a row. Paula has told Nora she is welcome to stay “whenever you need to,” but Nora does not pay rent. Detectives have been surveilling Paula because they believe she sells prescription pills. One morning, Detectives Lee and Ortiz knock and announce, “Police.” Nora opens the door. Lee immediately says, “We have a search warrant—step aside.” Nora steps back and the detectives enter. In fact, they do not have a warrant. Inside, Ortiz sees a closed backpack on the living-room couch with the name “NORA” on a luggage tag attached to the zipper. Ortiz opens the backpack and finds several bottles of pills. In a kitchen cabinet, Lee finds a bag of cocaine. The detectives arrest Nora and Paula when Paula arrives home an hour later. Meanwhile, that same day, Paula’s friend Ben gets a ride from Driver Carl in Carl’s sister’s car. Carl’s girlfriend, Dana, sits in the back seat. As they leave the airport, Carl makes an illegal U-turn. Officer Singh stops the car for the traffic violation. As Officer Singh approaches, Carl quickly drops a small bag of heroin into Dana’s purse on the back seat. When Singh asks for license and registration, Ben (front passenger) opens the glove compartment to look for the registration. The glove compartment is packed with heroin packets, and one falls into Ben’s lap. Singh immediately arrests all three occupants and then searches the passenger compartment, including Dana’s purse, finding the heroin bag Carl dropped. Questions: Can Nora move to suppress the cocaine found in Paula’s kitchen cabinet? Explain. Can Nora move to suppress the pills found in the backpack? Explain. Can Paula move to suppress (a) the cocaine and (b) the pills? Explain. Can Ben move to suppress the heroin found in the glove compartment? Explain. Can Carl move to suppress the heroin found in Dana’s purse? Explain. What remedy(ies) apply to the apartment search, and are there any limitations or exceptions that matter on these facts? Note: Do not discuss Fifth Amendment/Miranda issues. Focus on Fourth Amendment standing, search validity, and suppression.

Olivia owns a small event-planning business in California. Her longtime friend, Marcus, recently left his job and told Olivia that he was considering moving out of California to look for work. During a conversation over coffee, Olivia said to Marcus: “If you stay here and help me with my event business for the next few months, I’ll pay you $6,000.” Marcus responded, “Okay, I can do that.” Over the next three months, Marcus worked regularly for Olivia. He helped coordinate events, communicated with vendors, assisted at weekend events, and handled administrative tasks during the week. Olivia relied on Marcus’s help to keep her business running smoothly. During this time, Olivia did not pay Marcus but frequently thanked him and told others that Marcus was “a huge help” to her business. Marcus turned down a job opportunity in another state because he believed Olivia would pay him the $6,000 as promised. At the end of the three-month period, Marcus asked Olivia for the $6,000 she promised him. Olivia explained that she believed that she was “just helping a friend” and that Marcus had volunteered his time. Marcus seeks to enforce Olivia’s promise. Was a valid contract formed between Olivia and Marcus? Discuss fully. Assume that a court finds no valid contract. Can Marcus enforce Olivia’s promise under the doctrine of promissory estoppel? Discuss fully.

Refrigerated foods with long refrigeration shelf lives have increased microbial risk due totemperature abuse in the food supply chain.