Related to law firm partners question explained in video lesson
In this setup, particularly in questions 14 and 15, how can we certainly assume that King will come IMMEDIATELY before James? Just because King is said to come before James doesn't necessarily mean that they will be consecutive right?
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
For question 14, K doesn't have to go immediately before J.
Recall the chain we built using the rules
H - N - O
K - J - M
N - G - I
J - G - I
Notice that G has 4 people before it (H, N, K, and J), so there's no way that G can go in 1964. It's possible that the order before G is H, K, N, and J, so K doesn't have to go right before J here.
For question 15, we're told that J joined in 1962. Looking at our chain, we know that J has K before it. Since there's only one spot before J since J is in 1962, then this means K must be in 1961 and go first. Here, K must go right before J. We know that (E) cannot be true because O has 2 people before it (H and N), and there are already 2 people on the board (K and J), so the earliest O could go is 1965. Thus, (E) is the correct answer choice.
Does that make sense? Let us know if you have any questions!
