Logical Reasoning

PT101 · S3 · Q8 Jones is selling a house to Smith

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Jones is selling a house to Smith.

Conclusion

Fact-set; the right answer follows directly from the contract terms and the truss-roof fact.

Evidence

(1) For up to a year after ownership transfer, Jones is responsible for repairing "major structural defects," defined as defects in the roof or roof-supporting components. (2) Jones is not responsible for any other repairs. (3) The house has a truss roof, meaning only the exterior walls support the roof.

Evaluate

Plug in the truss-roof fact. The "roof-supporting components" of this particular house are the exterior walls (and the roof itself). So the nonexterior (interior) walls don't support the roof. They aren't covered by the "major structural defects" definition. And Jones is explicitly not responsible for anything else. Therefore Jones has no obligation to repair defects in the interior walls.

Goal

Find the answer that says: the contract doesn't oblige Jones to repair defects in the house's nonexterior walls. Avoid answers that overstate (claim no defects currently exist), shift to Smith's obligations, or invent facts about the past or about what Jones knew.

8.

It can be properly concluded from the information above that

  1. Jones did not know of

    Unsupported

    The passage tells us nothing about what Jones knew when the contract was written. Jones could have known about defects, suspected them, or had no idea — the passage gives no information either way. Must Be True answers can't fill in unstated facts about people's knowledge.

    2% picked this

  2. although other components of the

    Unsupported

    The passage doesn't tell us the current state of the roof or roof-supporting components. They might be defect-free, or they might have hidden defects that haven't been discovered yet. The contract just specifies who pays for repairs if defects show up — it doesn't say whether any currently exist.

    2% picked this

  3. Correct

    the contract does not oblige

    Why this is right

    This follows from the chain. Jones is on the hook only for roof and roof-supporting-component defects, and explicitly nothing else. In this truss-roof house, the only walls that support the roof are the exterior walls. So the nonexterior (interior) walls aren't roof-supporting and don't fall under Jones's repair obligation. The contract therefore does not oblige Jones to repair defects in the interior walls.

    Skill tested: Must be True · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    78% picked this

  4. Smith will be obligated to

    Unsupported

    The passage describes Jones's obligations under the contract; it says nothing about what Smith is or isn't obligated to do. Smith may or may not have responsibilities for non-Jones-covered repairs depending on contract terms not given in the passage. We can't infer Smith's repair obligations from what we're told.

    17% picked this

  5. in the past Jones has

    Unsupported

    The passage gives no history of past repairs or defects in the exterior walls. We have no information about what has happened to this house before. This is a fact about the past that the passage simply doesn't supply.

    1% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free