Consider the following premises. It is not raining or it is snowing. If Jennifer were a lawyer, then it is overcast. Jennifer is a lawyer. It is not overcast. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: Richard is playing squash or it is snowing.
 From the fact that if Jennifer were a lawyer, then it is overcast, and that it is not overcast we can infer that Jennifer is not a lawyer via modus tollens. From the fact that Jennifer is a lawyer we can infer that Jennifer is a lawyer or it is raining via addition. From the fact that Jennifer is a lawyer or it is raining, and that Jennifer is not a lawyer we can infer that it is raining via disjunctive syllogism. From the fact that it is raining we can infer that it is raining or Richard is playing squash via addition. Finally, from the fact that it is raining or Richard is playing squash, and that it is not raining or it is snowing we can infer that Richard is playing squash or it is snowing via resolution. Therefore, the answer is yes. Notice, however, that the premises were contradictory, so we can infer anything from them.