Consider the following premises. For all x_10, x_10 will make tea or x_10 is a politician. For all x_10, if x_10 were poor, then x_10 is a lawyer. For all x_10, if x_10 were a server, then x_10 is poor. There is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 makes tea, then x_10 is a lawyer. For all x_10, x_10 is a server or x_10 is not a politician. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_10 for which x_10 is a lawyer.
 From the fact that for all x_10, x_10 is a server or x_10 is not a politician we can infer that for all x_10, if x_10 were a politician, then x_10 is a server. From the fact that for all x_10, if x_10 were a politician, then x_10 is a server, and that for all x_10, if x_10 were a server, then x_10 is poor we can infer that for all x_10, if x_10 were a politician, then x_10 is poor. From the fact that for all x_10, if x_10 were a politician, then x_10 is poor, and that for all x_10, if x_10 were poor, then x_10 is a lawyer we can infer that for all x_10, if x_10 were a politician, then x_10 is a lawyer. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 makes tea, then x_10 is a lawyer, that for all x_10, if x_10 were a politician, then x_10 is a lawyer, and that for all x_10, x_10 will make tea or x_10 is a politician we can infer that there is at least one x_10 for which x_10 is a lawyer. Therefore, the answer is yes.