Consider the following premises. For all x_14, x_14 will drive a car. For all x_14, x_14 will play tennis if and only if x_14 is a writer. There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a writer. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_14, x_14 will not play tennis.
 From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a writer, and that for all x_14, x_14 will drive a car we can infer that some writers will drive a car. From the fact that for all x_14, x_14 will play tennis if and only if x_14 is a writer we can infer that for all x_14, if x_14 were a writer, then x_14 is playing tennis. From the fact that some writers will drive a car we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a writer. Finally, from the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 were a writer, then x_14 is playing tennis, and that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a writer we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will play tennis, which contradicts that For all x_14, x_14 will not play tennis. Therefore, the answer is no.