Consider the following premises. There is at least one x for which if x were a lawyer, then x is happy. For all x, x is happy if and only if x is rich. For all x, x is not a lawyer. For all x, if x were happy, then x is a lawyer. Can we infer the following from them? For all x, x is rich.
 From the fact that there is at least one x for which if x were a lawyer, then x is happy, and that for all x, if x were happy, then x is a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x for which x is a lawyer if and only if x is happy. From the fact that there is at least one x for which x is a lawyer if and only if x is happy, and that for all x, x is not a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x for which x is not happy. Finally, from the fact that for all x, x is happy if and only if x is rich, and that there is at least one x for which x is not happy we can infer that there is at least one x for which x is not rich, which contradicts that For all x, x is rich. Therefore, the answer is no.