Top Law Schools

Can you be in R and T without being in U?

I thought the answer is B, because one cannot be in R and be in exactly two areas (i.e. R and T). Did I envision this incorrectly? Is U just a mere part of the intersection of R and T, instead of being the whole intersection?

Thanks.

The set-up states that U has to be completely within R and T, but this doesn't necessarily mean that U has to cover the entire common area. For question 8, if K is in only 2 areas it has to be in R and T. It can't be in S because of J and it can't be in U because K would be covering three areas. With that in mind, J can't be in T because K is there.

HTH.

Thanks, that was what I was thinking.

I appreciate the explanation.