Law School Discussion

"hospital auditor" question

"hospital auditor" question
« on: November 21, 2007, 12:39:27 AM »
Hospital auditor: The R family stipulated that the funds they donated to the neurological clinic all be used to minimize patients' suffering. The clinic administration is clearly violating these terms, since it has allocated nearly 1/5 of those funds for new diagnostic technologies, kinstead of letting that money flow directly to its patients.

Clinic administrator: but successful development of new technologies will allow early diagnostis of many neurological disorders. In a majority of cases, patients who are treated early suffer far less than do patients who are treated later in advanced stages.

The clinic administrator responds by

A. demonstrating that the auditor's conclusion, though broadly correct, stands in need of a minor qualification
B. showing that the auditor's argument fails to seperate what is the case from what ought to be
C. reminding the auditor that being told what to do is tantamount to being told how to do it
D. arguing that, in assessing the violation, the reasoning motivating the violation needs to be considered
E. reinterpreting a key phrase in the hospital auditor's argument so as to undermine an assumptiong underlying the argument


can somebody please tell me why e is correct? i don't see the key phrase being reinterpreted.

Re: "hospital auditor" question
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2007, 01:30:13 AM »
thanks jeffort :)