Questões de Concurso Público METRÔ-SP 2016 para Advogado Júnior
Foram encontradas 60 questões
Considere as afirmações verdadeiras:
I. Se chove, então o nível do rio sobe.
II. Se o nível do rio não sobe, então dá para pescar.
III. Se o nível do rio sobe, então dá para saltar da ponte.
IV. Não deu para saltar da ponte.
A partir dessas afirmações é correto concluir que
Considere as afirmações verdadeiras:
I. Qualquer animal cachorro tem quatro patas.
II. Nem todos os animais tem quatro patas.
III. Há animais de quatro patas que são vertebrados.
IV. As aves possuem apenas duas patas.
A partir dessas informações é correto concluir que
A sequência numérica 1/2 ; 3/4 ; 5/6 ; 7/8 ;... é ilimitada e criada seguindo o mesmo padrão lógico. A diferença entre o 500º e o 50º termos dessa sequência é igual a
Ao todo são 92 pessoas entre Arquitetos (A), Urbanistas (U) e Engenheiros (E).
Considere as informações a seguir, com as respectivas legendas, e sabendo que uma pessoa pode exercer mais de uma dessas funções.
I. São A e U apenas, 15 pessoas.
II. São A e E apenas, 12 pessoas.
III. São E e U apenas, 7 pessoas.
IV. Dentre aqueles que exercem apenas uma dessas funções, há quatro Urbanistas a mais que Arquitetos, e quatro Engenheiros a mais que Urbanistas.
V. Os que exercem apenas uma função, ao todo, são quatro pessoas a menos do que aqueles que exercem as três funções.
A partir dessas informações é correto determinar que o número total de engenheiros é
A sequência: 1A; 2AE; 3AEI; 4AEIO; 5AEIOU; 6AEIO; 7AEI; 8AE; 9A; 10AE; 11AEI; 12AEIO; . . ., ilimitada, mantém o mesmo padrão lógico. Cada termo dessa sequência é composto por um certo número de símbolos gráficos, sejam algarismos ou letras. O décimo primeiro termo, que é 11AEI, é formado por cinco símbolos gráficos: 1, 1, A, E, e I. O milésimo décimo quarto termo dessa sequência é formado por um número de símbolos gráficos igual a
Atenção: As questões de números 26 a 28 referem-se ao texto abaixo.
Judges Push Brevity in Briefs, and Get a Torrent of Arguments
By ELIZABETH OLSON
OCT. 3, 2016
The Constitution of the United States clocks in at 4,543 words. Yet a number of lawyers contend that 14,000 words are barely enough to lay out their legal arguments.
That’s the maximum word count for briefs filed in federal appellate courts. For years, judges have complained that too many briefs are repetitive and full of outmoded legal jargon, and that they take up too much of their time.
A recent proposal to bring the limit down by 1,500 words unleashed an outcry among lawyers.
Lawyers in criminal, environmental and securities law insisted that briefs’ lengths should not be shortened because legal issues and statutes are more complex than ever.
As a result, the new word limit − which takes effect on Dec. 1 − will be 13,500 words, a reduction of only 500 words. And appellate judges will have the freedom to opt out of the limits.
The new limit may not provide much relief for judges deluged with verbose briefs.
While workloads vary, according to federal court data, the average federal appeals court judge, for example, might need to read filings for around 1,200 cases annually.
That amount of reading − especially bad reading − can thin the patience of even the most diligent judge.
Briefs “are too long to be persuasive,” said Laurence H. Silberman, a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
In arguing against a reduction of words, the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers urged singling out “bad briefs” rather than only lengthy ones. It advised courts to “post on their court websites short videos outlining how to write a decent brief.”
Robert N. Markle, a federal appellate lawyer, has argued − in his own personal view, not the government’s − that the limit should be reduced to 10,000 words. In a typical case, he said, “nothing justifies even approaching, much less reaching or exceeding 14,000 words.”
Still, he acknowledged that the cut of 500 words “was at least a start.”
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/business/dealbook/judges-push-brevity-in-briefs-and-get-a-torrent-of-arguments. html?_r=0)
A melhor tradução para are barely enough, no trecho Yet a number of lawyers contend that 14,000 words are barely enough to lay out their legal arguments, é
Atenção: As questões de números 26 a 28 referem-se ao texto abaixo.
Judges Push Brevity in Briefs, and Get a Torrent of Arguments
By ELIZABETH OLSON
OCT. 3, 2016
The Constitution of the United States clocks in at 4,543 words. Yet a number of lawyers contend that 14,000 words are barely enough to lay out their legal arguments.
That’s the maximum word count for briefs filed in federal appellate courts. For years, judges have complained that too many briefs are repetitive and full of outmoded legal jargon, and that they take up too much of their time.
A recent proposal to bring the limit down by 1,500 words unleashed an outcry among lawyers.
Lawyers in criminal, environmental and securities law insisted that briefs’ lengths should not be shortened because legal issues and statutes are more complex than ever.
As a result, the new word limit − which takes effect on Dec. 1 − will be 13,500 words, a reduction of only 500 words. And appellate judges will have the freedom to opt out of the limits.
The new limit may not provide much relief for judges deluged with verbose briefs.
While workloads vary, according to federal court data, the average federal appeals court judge, for example, might need to read filings for around 1,200 cases annually.
That amount of reading − especially bad reading − can thin the patience of even the most diligent judge.
Briefs “are too long to be persuasive,” said Laurence H. Silberman, a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
In arguing against a reduction of words, the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers urged singling out “bad briefs” rather than only lengthy ones. It advised courts to “post on their court websites short videos outlining how to write a decent brief.”
Robert N. Markle, a federal appellate lawyer, has argued − in his own personal view, not the government’s − that the limit should be reduced to 10,000 words. In a typical case, he said, “nothing justifies even approaching, much less reaching or exceeding 14,000 words.”
Still, he acknowledged that the cut of 500 words “was at least a start.”
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/business/dealbook/judges-push-brevity-in-briefs-and-get-a-torrent-of-arguments. html?_r=0)
No trecho they take up too much of their time, os pronomes they e their referem-se, respectivamente, a
Atenção: As questões de números 26 a 28 referem-se ao texto abaixo.
Judges Push Brevity in Briefs, and Get a Torrent of Arguments
By ELIZABETH OLSON
OCT. 3, 2016
The Constitution of the United States clocks in at 4,543 words. Yet a number of lawyers contend that 14,000 words are barely enough to lay out their legal arguments.
That’s the maximum word count for briefs filed in federal appellate courts. For years, judges have complained that too many briefs are repetitive and full of outmoded legal jargon, and that they take up too much of their time.
A recent proposal to bring the limit down by 1,500 words unleashed an outcry among lawyers.
Lawyers in criminal, environmental and securities law insisted that briefs’ lengths should not be shortened because legal issues and statutes are more complex than ever.
As a result, the new word limit − which takes effect on Dec. 1 − will be 13,500 words, a reduction of only 500 words. And appellate judges will have the freedom to opt out of the limits.
The new limit may not provide much relief for judges deluged with verbose briefs.
While workloads vary, according to federal court data, the average federal appeals court judge, for example, might need to read filings for around 1,200 cases annually.
That amount of reading − especially bad reading − can thin the patience of even the most diligent judge.
Briefs “are too long to be persuasive,” said Laurence H. Silberman, a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
In arguing against a reduction of words, the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers urged singling out “bad briefs” rather than only lengthy ones. It advised courts to “post on their court websites short videos outlining how to write a decent brief.”
Robert N. Markle, a federal appellate lawyer, has argued − in his own personal view, not the government’s − that the limit should be reduced to 10,000 words. In a typical case, he said, “nothing justifies even approaching, much less reaching or exceeding 14,000 words.”
Still, he acknowledged that the cut of 500 words “was at least a start.”
(Adapted from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/business/dealbook/judges-push-brevity-in-briefs-and-get-a-torrent-of-arguments. html?_r=0)
Segundo se infere do texto,
Atenção: As questões de números 29 e 30 referem-se ao texto abaixo.
Subway and local train systems pose many of the same obstacles as airports for security professionals. Their efficacy relies on efficiency: People want to be able to get in and out as quickly as possible. But in both Delhi and Mumbai, subway lines often stretch out of the stations, as people patiently wait to put their bags through an X-ray machine and walk through a metal detector. Do citizens accept it because it’s always been that way? Or is the memory of the 2006 and 2008 attacks in Mumbai fresh enough that they are willing to take on the inconvenience, as long as it translates to safety? Programs like Global Entry and TSA PreCheck in the U.S. have been employed to increase the number of "known travelers" (and speed up the process when security risks are low), but recent news of a flight attendant who was part of TSA's Known Crewmember program − found with 70 pounds of cocaine in her carry-on − shows that no system is flawless.
Subways hold mass appeal because of their convenience, and it seems unlikely that the Delhi model could be replicated in other large public transit systems. Delhi has a daily ridership of about 2.3 million passengers, and the X-ray machines and metal detectors already act as a bottleneck to service. (New York, by comparison, has a daily ridership of about 6 million.) "Airport-style security in a train station or metro would be extremely cumbersome, given the much larger number of passengers using metro systems on a daily basis," says Matthew Finn, a London-based security specialist. Instead, he sees a different approach as a solution to metro security: "There are roles for other security layers, such as explosive detection canine units, real-time video analysis, behavioral analysis, and passive explosive trace detection systems."
(Adapted from http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2016-03-25/brussels-attacks-expose-global-weaknesses-in-airport-subway-security)
De acordo com o texto,
Atenção: As questões de números 29 e 30 referem-se ao texto abaixo.
Subway and local train systems pose many of the same obstacles as airports for security professionals. Their efficacy relies on efficiency: People want to be able to get in and out as quickly as possible. But in both Delhi and Mumbai, subway lines often stretch out of the stations, as people patiently wait to put their bags through an X-ray machine and walk through a metal detector. Do citizens accept it because it’s always been that way? Or is the memory of the 2006 and 2008 attacks in Mumbai fresh enough that they are willing to take on the inconvenience, as long as it translates to safety? Programs like Global Entry and TSA PreCheck in the U.S. have been employed to increase the number of "known travelers" (and speed up the process when security risks are low), but recent news of a flight attendant who was part of TSA's Known Crewmember program − found with 70 pounds of cocaine in her carry-on − shows that no system is flawless.
Subways hold mass appeal because of their convenience, and it seems unlikely that the Delhi model could be replicated in other large public transit systems. Delhi has a daily ridership of about 2.3 million passengers, and the X-ray machines and metal detectors already act as a bottleneck to service. (New York, by comparison, has a daily ridership of about 6 million.) "Airport-style security in a train station or metro would be extremely cumbersome, given the much larger number of passengers using metro systems on a daily basis," says Matthew Finn, a London-based security specialist. Instead, he sees a different approach as a solution to metro security: "There are roles for other security layers, such as explosive detection canine units, real-time video analysis, behavioral analysis, and passive explosive trace detection systems."
(Adapted from http://www.cntraveler.com/stories/2016-03-25/brussels-attacks-expose-global-weaknesses-in-airport-subway-security)
Segundo o texto,
Frederico nasceu no país “X” e veio para o Brasil com 21 anos de idade. Após alguns anos, preenchidos os requisitos necessários, naturalizou-se brasileiro. Solteiro, sem filhos e sem nenhum familiar no país, após sua naturalização, restou comprovado seu envolvimento com o tráfico ilícito de entorpecentes e drogas afins. De acordo com a Constituição Federal, neste caso, a extradição
João, brasileiro nato, casou-se com Giulia, italiana nata, e, desempregado, foi com ela morar na Itália, onde nasceu Luna, filha do casal. Luna não foi registrada em repartição pública brasileira e, ao atingir a maioridade, veio a residir no Brasil onde fez a opção pela nacionalidade brasileira. Eleita Deputada Federal, candidatou-se à Presidência da Câmara dos Deputados. Para esse cargo que pleiteia, de acordo com a Constituição Federal, Luna
Sob o argumento de violação do direito à vida e à dignidade da pessoa humana, o Procurador-Geral da República propôs ação direta de inconstitucionalidade contra determinado artigo da Lei Federal “X”. O Procurador-Geral da República
Alberto, estudante de Direito, está aprendendo sobre a defesa do Estado e das Instituições Democráticas. Leu na Constituição Federal que, no Brasil, para preservar ou prontamente restabelecer, em locais restritos e determinados, a ordem pública ou a paz social ameaçadas por grave e iminente instabilidade institucional pode, o Presidente da República,
Orestes tornou-se desembargador do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo pelo quinto constitucional há um ano. De acordo com a Constituição Federal, Orestes
Walter deseja concorrer às eleições presidenciais e verificou que, de acordo com a Constituição Federal, será considerado eleito Presidente o candidato que, registrado por partido político, obtiver a maioria absoluta de votos, não computados os em branco e os nulos. Se, entretanto, nenhum candidato alcançar a maioria absoluta na primeira votação,
Foi aberta licitação com a finalidade de realizar obras e serviços de engenharia no Metrô de São Paulo para modernizá-lo e expandi-lo. O valor estimado da contratação é de R$ 1.600.000,00. A licitação será feita mediante
Lauro, no exercício de cargo público em órgão da Administração direta da União, deixou de cumprir a exigência de requisitos de acessibilidade previstos na legislação. Lauro, independentemente das sanções penais, civis e administrativas previstas na legislação específica, ficará sujeito ao ressarcimento integral do dano, se houver, perda
Considere as seguintes hipóteses:
I. Clodoaldo sofreu um grave acidente com sua bicicleta encontrando-se com diversas sequelas consolidadas e, sendo assim, de forma permanente, não pode exprimir sua vontade.
II. Em razão de um acidente vascular cerebral, Cindy está com paralisia temporária de alguns músculos corporais. Dessa forma, transitoriamente, não pode exprimir sua vontade.
III. Marta, quinze anos de idade, é uma adolescente exemplar. É estudiosa, não usa nenhum tipo de drogas e pratica diversos esportes.
IV. Danilo, vinte e nove anos de idade, é solteiro, tendo sido diagnosticado por diversos médicos como pródigo uma vez que possui gastos financeiros sem controle, que podem afetar o seu patrimônio.
De acordo com o Código Civil brasileiro, são incapazes, relativamente a certos atos ou à maneira de os exercer, os indicados APENAS em
Bromélia celebrou negócio jurídico com Camélia, que é relativamente incapaz para exercer determinados atos da vida civil. Neste caso, de acordo com o Código Civil brasileiro, esta incapacidade relativa
Conheça nossos planos