BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Plaintiff vs. Defendant

Expert replies
by XLogic » Thu Aug 04, 2011 3:11 pm
Female Plaintiff: At 10 pm, I parked my car in bar-X's open parking lot and went into bar-X to meet with friends for drinks. Three hours later I came out to find my passenger side door and window damaged. Two witnesses say, at 12:30 am, the defendant's car collided with my car which caused the damages to my car; Both witnesses statements are included in the police report I have presented to the court. therefore, the defendant owes me $5000 in damages to fix my car.

Female Defendant: I agree I was at the bar, at 10 pm, on the day in question. But I left my car at the bar because I was drunk, so my friend drop me off at home, at midnight. I talked to my neighbor at 12:30 AM before going to bed. When I returned to the bar the next day I discovered that my car had been stolen. The report I filed with the police has been presented to the court. My car was stolen at the time of the incident so I was not driving my car when it hit the plaintiff's car; therefore, I am not responsible for any damages to the plaintiff's car.

The Law: If Defendant was behind the wheel when collision occurred, then Defendant is liable for damages to Plaintiff.
Burden of proof: Plaintiff to prove by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) that the defendant is guilty

Which one of the following most helps the Plaintiff's argument ?

(A) Plaintiff presented a police report (to the Judge) that clearly stated (beyond any reasonable doubt) that the defendant's car was involved in the collision
(B) The Plaintiff claimed she talked to two more witnesses that saw the defendant leave Bar-X alone at 12:00 am (on day of incident)
(C) Defendant claimed that after talking with some lawyers, she did not deem it necessary to provide any witnesses to corroborate her story
(D) The Defendant was involved in a hit and run incident a month prior to this incident
(E) A call was made to the police at 12:20 AM, from BarX's parking lot, about a suspicious man attempting to break into the defendant's car


(Note: This is not necessarily a CR formatted question)
> Please explain your reasoning.
my post helped --> thank me!
don't thank me --> my post = what the..??
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by coderversion1 » Thu Aug 04, 2011 3:53 pm
Different question but seems pretty simple to me.

Plaintiff argues that 'defendant owes $5000 to fix her car', Law says that 'If defendant is behind the wheel only then she's liable to pay'. Correct answer should support the fact that defendant was behind the wheel.

A. This has already been proved by witnesses. Hence it's of less help to Plaintiff's claim.
B. This fact already present in defendants claim. The fact that she was home by 12:30 means she must have left early. Also, collision occurred at 12:30 (according to witnesses) so if she left at 12:00 according to this answer choice, it would not help Plaintiff.
C. If defendant does not bring any witness and relies on her story alone, it has low credibility and hence can be assumed to be untrue. We can keep this option as a contender, and look for better options.
Also mentioning '..after talking to lawyers ..' seems to play with common thinking that if lawyers approved it, it must be right and hence MAY BE an effort is made(by framers of question) to hide the answer.
D. This one incident may not be sufficient to prove the defendant is careless and bad driver, but still may be a contender. Let's keep this option aside too for analysis later.
E. This strengthens defendants argument, not plaintiff's.

Between C and D. C appears to be a better choice. IMO answer is C.

OA please. Expert's explanations too.
Join the discussion

by XLogic » Thu Aug 04, 2011 4:08 pm
coderversion1 wrote: Plaintiff argues that 'defendant owes $5000 to fix her car', Law says that 'If defendant is behind the wheel only then she's liable to pay'. Correct answer should support the fact that defendant was behind the wheel.
This is exactly the issue at hand.
coderversion1 wrote:
A. This has already been proved by witnesses. Hence it's of less help to Plaintiff's claim.
B. This fact already present in defendants claim. The fact that she was home by 12:30 means she must have left early. Also, collision occurred at 12:30 (according to witnesses) so if she left at 12:00 according to this answer choice, it would not help Plaintiff.
C. If defendant does not bring any witness and relies on her story alone, it has low credibility and hence can be assumed to be untrue. We can keep this option as a contender, and look for better options.
Also mentioning '..after talking to lawyers ..' seems to play with common thinking that if lawyers approved it, it must be right and hence MAY BE an effort is made(by framers of question) to hide the answer.
Nicely done here. 2 crucial claims to support her case, yet she offers no witnesses.
coderversion1 wrote: D. This one incident may not be sufficient to prove the defendant is careless and bad driver, but still may be a contender. Let's keep this option aside too for analysis later.
E. This strengthens defendants argument, not plaintiff's.
Agree with D and E. Though, I also thought D was irrelevant to the current case.

More Thoughts??
my post helped --> thank me!
don't thank me --> my post = what the..??
Join the discussion