There Are No Right Answers

I've been getting my multiple choice practice from old BarBri books, but today I decided to mix things up with a hundred questions out of an Emanuel book at the library. Emanuel and BarBri obviously base their practice questions on a common set of released bar questions, because many of the Emanuel questions were substantially identical to questions I had already seen in my BarBri books. Only names and minor details were changed.

But here's the thing: in at least two cases, the Emanuel and BarBri books had opposite answers. Opposite! Contrast this passage from BarBri's answer key:

The general rule is that one who possesses an animal not customarily domesticated in that area is strictly liable for all harm done by the animal . . . . For trespassers, however, strict liability is not imposed against landowners.

with this passage from Emanuel's:

. . . the skunk will be considered a wild animal, making Householder strictly liable for damage it creates. As a result, Walker's status as a trespasser will not relieve Householder of liability.

Why must you mess with my head, Emanuel? I don't need this cognitive dissonance a week before the exam, so I'm just going to assume that the rule I learned first (BarBri's) is right.