Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT137 S4 Q19 Explanation

If the jury did not return

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

TopicsParallel

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

If the jury did not return a verdict, there would still be media trucks outside the courthouse. There are no media trucks outside the must have returned a verdict.

What this question is testing

Parallel

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
19.

The pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of

Answer choices

  1. Wrong Reasoning / Wrong Validity3% picked this

    If a hurricane arises off the coast this summer, our town will see less tourism than usual. But since there will be no hurricane

    If a hurricane arises off H ? ?T the coast this summer, our town will see less tourism than usual. There will be no ~H hurricane this summer. There will be no less ~?T tourism than usual.

  2. Correct90% picked this

    If Peter did not buy a house, he would have rented an apartment. Peter did not rent an apartment, so he

    Why this is right

    If Peter did not buy a ~BH ? RA house, he would have rented an apartment. Peter did not rent an ~RA apartment. He must have bought BH a house.

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

  3. Wrong Reasoning5% picked this

    Renate promised Linus that if his car was not working, she would drive him to work. Linus's car is not working, so Renate

    Renate promised Linus ~CW ? DW that if his car was not working, she would drive him to work. Linus’s car is not ~CW working. Renate must have DW driven him to work.

  4. Wrong Reasoning2% picked this

    If Kay's television was not working last night, she would have gone to a movie. Her television has not been working for the past

    If Kay’s television was ~TW ? GM not working last night, she would have gone to a movie. Her television has not ~TW been working for the past week. She must have gone GM to a movie last night.

  5. Wrong Reasoning / Wrong Validity1% picked this

    If Ralph had told Manuela about the problem, Manuela would have solved it. But Ralph did not tell Manuela about the problem, so

    If Ralph had told TM ? MS Manuela about the problem, Manuela would have solved it. Ralph did not tell ~TM Manuela about the problem. Someone else must ~MS have solved it.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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