Deck 8: Negligence and Strict Liability

Question 1

In most of the states, a sixteen-year-old who drives a car will be held to the same standard of care as an adult for purposes of determining negligence.

Answer 1

True

Question 2

The general rule for the standard of care used in tort law is: a person is under a duty to all others at all times to exercise reasonable care for the safety of other persons and their property.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

In some instances, people may be held liable for injuries they have caused even though they have not acted intentionally or negligently.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

The Love v.Hardee's Food Systems, Inc.case dealt with the responsibility of the owner or possessor of property to an invitee to warn of, remove, or barricade a dangerous condition of the premises.

Question 5

A "reasonable person standard" does not apply to children since they do not have the judgment, intelligence, knowledge, or experience of adults.

Question 6

A blind person will be held to the standard of care of the reasonable blind person rather than that of the reasonable sighted person for purposes of determining negligence.

Question 7

Even if a defendant's own negligent conduct created an emergency, he will not be liable for the consequences of the conduct if he acted with reasonable care in the resulting emergency situation.

Question 8

A violation of a statute constitutes negligence per se regardless of whether the injured party is a member of the class protected by the statute.

Question 9

A defendant will be liable for all harm that can be traced back to the defendant's negligence.

Question 10

A reasonable person, as used in the law of torts, is a fictitious individual who is always careful, prudent, and never negligent.

Question 11

The standard of conduct which serves as the basis for the law of negligence is usually determined on a cost-benefit or risk-benefit analysis.

Question 12

Compliance with a legislative enactment or administrative regulation does not prevent a finding of negligence if a reasonable person would have taken additional precautions to avoid harm.

Question 13

If a raccoon gets loose from a cage and harms someone, the owner can escape liability by showing that he took great care to keep the animal confined.

Question 14

All intervening events that occur subsequent to the defendant's negligent conduct will relieve the defendant of liability.

Question 15

In applying the reasonable person standard, the court takes into account a person's physical, but not mental handicaps.

Question 16

The owner of land is liable to adult trespassers for failure to maintain the land in a reasonably safe condition.

Question 17

A person who falls asleep while driving would not be liable for any resulting injury since it would be an unavoidable accident.

Question 18

Liability for the negligent conduct of a defendant requires not only that the conduct in fact caused injury to the plaintiff but also that it was the proximate cause of the injury.

Question 19

Tom's dog has bitten three mail carriers, but Tom can't bear to chain him up.When the dog bites the newsboy, Tom will be strictly liable.

Question 20

If negligence of the plaintiff and negligence of the defendant proximately caused the injury and damage sustained by the plaintiff, the plaintiff can recover some damages in those states where contributory negligence is still recognized.

Question 21

Express voluntary assumption of the risk is a defense to an action based upon strict liability.

Question 22

Frank, after drinking too much alcohol, would be held to a lower standard of care than if he were sober, because a reasonable drunk person is less careful than a reasonable sober one.

Question 23

The plaintiff must prove that the defendant's negligent conduct proximately caused harm to a legally protected interest in order to have a valid negligence action.

Question 24

Ray is informed that his six-year-old child is shooting in the street with a .22 rifle.Ray fails to take the gun away from the child.The child unintentionally shoots Bill, a pedestrian.Ray is liable to Bill.

Question 25

If the tortious conduct of Mandy is insufficient by itself to cause Alex's harm, Mandy's conduct cannot be considered in combination with Brent's tortious conduct to determine factual cause of Alex's harm.

Question 26

There is an established rule in the law of torts that even one who has not created a peril has a duty to take affirmative action to assist an imperiled person, no matter what the relationship with that person, when the imperiled person can be saved from harm at little or no personal risk to the rescuer.

Question 27

A possessor of land has a legal duty to warn business invitees of obvious dangers that invitees should be able to discover themselves.

Question 28

Even though contributory negligence is proven by a defendant in a state in which it acts as a complete bar to recovery, the plaintiff may still recover if the defendant had the last clear chance to avoid the injury.

Question 29

Res ipsa loquitur makes it easier for the defendant to prevail in a negligence action.

Question 30

If a person's 150-pound sheep dog has a propensity to jump enthusiastically on visitors, the animal's keeper would be liable for any damages done by the dog's playfulness.

Question 31

By law, bystanders are always required to help others in peril.

Question 32

In determining a defendant's liability for negligence, his or her superior skill or knowledge will be attributed in applying the reasonable person standard, thus increasing the chance that the defendant may be held liable.

Question 33

Res ipsa loquitur means "the thing speaks for itself" and it permits the jury to infer negligent conduct and causation from the mere occurrence of certain types of events.

Question 34

Negligence per se is a defense in a negligence case.

Question 35

If an intervening cause is deemed to be a superseding cause, it does not relieve the defendant of liability for that harm.

Question 36

A tiger gets loose from the tent of a circus and mauls a passerby.The circus claims it has always treated the animal well and that it was not at all negligent in its handling of the animal.The circus has no liability for the injury caused by the animal.

Question 37

A person who negligently places another person in imminent danger is not liable for injury sustained by a third-party rescuer.

Question 38

A licensee for purposes of tort law is a person invited upon land as a member of the public or for a business purpose.

Question 39

A widely applied test for causation in fact is the "but for" test.

Question 40

If a defendant acts under emergency conditions, these conditions will be taken into account in applying the reasonable person standard.

Question 41

The Third Restatement of Torts has abandoned the defense of implied voluntary assumption of risk.

Question 42

For an action of negligence, five elements must be proved.

Question 43

A duty to act is imposed on those whose innocent conduct has injured another and left him helpless and in danger of further harm.

Question 44

All intervening causes of harm are also superseding causes.

Question 45

Pat and Sally started a charcoal fire for Sally's backyard barbecue and left it uncovered.Then Sally went into the kitchen to make hamburger patties.While Sally was inside, Pat backed up to catch a football and hit the grill, knocking the coals onto his feet.In a pure comparative negligence state, who is liable?

A)Sally is liable for ALL of Pat's injuries.
B)Sally is liable for Pat's injuries in proportion to the degree of fault or negligence found against her.
C)Sally is not liable for any of Pat's injuries.
D)Sally is liable for Pat's injuries only if Pat was more negligent than Sally.

Question 46

Henry was burning leaves in his backyard.One of the burning leaves was lifted by the wind into Bob's yard next door.It landed on the lawn mower which exploded, setting fire to the wooden lawn furniture.Henry's best argument against liability to Bob would be:

A)the leaf was not a substantial factor in causing the damage.
B)the gasoline in the lawn mower is a superseding cause of the damage.
C)it was not foreseeable that the lawn mower would explode.
D)the damage was not caused by the leaf but by the gasoline.

Question 47

A possessor of land must warn licensees of dangerous conditions of which the possessor has knowledge and the licensees do not and are not likely to discover.

Question 48

Mark is out sailing in his boat one evening when he hears a young girl crying for help in the middle of the lake.Which of the following is true?

A)Mark MUST help the girl or he will be liable for negligence.
B)Mark must help the girl ONLY if he knows her.
C)Mark MUST help the girl if he is the girl's uncle.
D)Mark MUST help the girl if he begins to rescue her and increases her danger.

Question 49

Because of the harshness of the all-or-nothing contributory negligence rule, nearly all states have now substituted the last clear chance doctrine for contributory negligence.

Question 50

If Janice, while driving her car, carelessly runs into Paul, a pedestrian who is crossing the street within the crosswalk, Janice is liable in negligence for:

A)physical injuries Paul sustains from the collision because Janice's negligent conduct proximately caused harm to a legally protected interest.
B)offensive contact if her side mirror brushes against Paul, even if there are no physical injuries to him.
C)offensive contact if her car touches Paul's coat, even if there is no damage to the coat.
D)All of the above.

Question 51

Which of the following must the plaintiff prove in an action for negligence?

A)Injury.
B)Res ipsa loquitur.
C)A reasonable person.
D)All of the above.

Question 52

There are no defenses available for strict liability; it is imposed absolutely.

Question 53

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur would permit the court to infer negligence in which of the following situations?

A)A ladder rung broke under the weight of a worker's foot.
B)A sign over a storefront fell on your head.
C)A dead tree limb overhanging the sidewalk fell onto your head.
D)(a) and (b).
E)(b) and (c).

Question 54

Some states have today merged the implied assumption of risk doctrine into their comparative negligence systems.

Question 55

Joe intentionally pushed Bill into a fence negligently erected by Sam around Sam's swimming pool.The fence caved in and Bill nearly drowned.Who is liable?

A)Sam because of his negligent conduct.
B)Sam because Joe's conduct would be foreseeable.
C)Joe because of his intentional intervening conduct.
D)Sam and Joe because they both contributed to the harm.

Question 56

Which of the following is correct with respect to the reasonable person standard?

A)It makes allowance for mental deficiency.
B)It makes allowance for physical disability.
C)It applies an individualized test to children that takes into consideration the child's age, intelligence, and experience.
D)Two of the above, (b) and (c).

Question 57

While comparative negligence is generally not a defense in a strict liability case, contributory negligence generally is a successful defense.

Question 58

The "but for" test is useful when two or more forces, each of which is sufficient to bring about the harm in question, are actively operating.

Question 59

By law, all apartment buildings in New Jersey must have smoke alarms in the ceilings.Mary suffers smoke inhalation because the smoke alarm in her apartment building was not yet installed.To win a negligence action against the building owner, Mary would have to prove:

A)a duty existed toward her.
B)a breach of that duty.
C)injury and causation.
D)All of the above.

Question 60

Chris was driving a car with defective brakes very slowly down Fifth Avenue looking for a parking place.Mindy jumped out into the street five feet in front of his car.Chris could not help but hit her.What is Chris's best defense to the charge of negligence?

A)Mindy had a mental deficiency.
B)He was not negligent since he did not have a statutory duty to keep his brakes in top condition.
C)Mindy crossed in the middle of the street, which is against the law.
D)He was lawfully seeking a parking place and did not see her jump out.

Question 61

In Soldano v.O'Daniels, the court re-examined the common-law rule of nonliability for not taking affirmative action to save someone from peril.The court considered which of the following factors with respect to imposing duties for affirmative action by third parties?

A)The examination and balancing of intervening causes and physical capabilities.
B)The financial duties of victim to rescuer.
C)Moral blame attached to the defendant's conduct and the policy of preventing future harm.
D)Moral blame attached to the victim's conduct.

Question 62

Defenses to an action in strict liability include:

A)contributory negligence only.
B)contributory negligence and comparative negligence.
C)comparative negligence only.
D)voluntary assumption of risk and in some states comparative negligence.

Question 63

Barb goes to Marlin's Department store to look for clothes.The store happens to be in the process of remodeling, and there is a lot of clutter in the aisle.Barb trips over the clutter and breaks her leg.What standard of care does the store have toward Barb under the circumstances?

A)None, because she came to the store voluntarily.
B)The store owes her a duty of only ordinary care, because she is a trespasser.
C)Because she is a public invitee, the store must warn her of hazards of which the store knows but which Barb is not likely to recognize.
D)Because Barb is a business visitor, the store must exercise reasonable care to protect her against dangerous conditions she is unlikely to discover.

Question 64

The local supermarket has a large, glass front door which is well lighted and plainly visible.Nelson, who is new in the neighborhood, mistook the glass for an open doorway and walked into it.If he shattered the door and injured himself:

A)the store is strictly liable to Nelson.
B)the store is not liable to Nelson since the door was well lighted and plainly visible.
C)the Palsgraf case would not allow Nelson to recover.
D)the store has no duty to Nelson.

Question 65

Arnie negligently stopped his car on the highway.Beth, who was driving along, saw Arnie's car in sufficient time to attempt to stop.However, Beth negligently put her foot on the accelerator instead of the brake.If she runs into Arnie's car as a result:

A)Arnie's contributory negligence will prevent his recovery from Beth in all jurisdictions.
B)Beth had the last clear chance to avoid the accident and will bear legal responsibility for it.
C)Arnie has assumed the risk of the accident.
D)because both parties were negligent, in a state that follows the comparative negligence doctrine, both parties will share the liability for their injuries.

Question 66

The rule which permits the jury to infer both negligent conduct and causation from the mere occurrence of certain events is:

A)proximate cause.
B)res ipsa loquitur.
C)causation in fact.
D)comparative negligence.

Question 67

A form of strict liability applies to all except which of the following situations?

A)A lawnmower sold in a defective condition that injures its owner.
B)A fireworks factory that blows up and injures townspeople and their property.
C)Abnormally risky medical procedures.
D)A herd of goats that walk onto a neighbor's property and trample and eat the neighbor's roses.

Question 68

As a general rule:

A)the defenses available to intentional torts and negligence are interchangeable.
B)if a plaintiff has established by a preponderance of the evidence all the required elements of a negligence action, the plaintiff will automatically recover damages.
C)any defense to an intentional tort is also available in an action for negligence.
D)more defenses are available for intentional torts than are available in negligence cases.

Question 69

Violation of a statute designed to protect underage, unlicensed drivers, as well as innocent third parties, from the consequences of juvenile car theft and "joy riding," by prohibiting car owners from leaving the keys in their car if the car is unattended, is likely to be characterized as:

A)negligence per se.
B)res ipsa loquitur.
C)contributory negligence.
D)assumption of risk.

Question 70

Which of the following is/are considered in determining the application of the reasonable person standard?

A)Physical disability.
B)Superior skill or knowledge.
C)Emergency circumstances.
D)All of the above are considered.

Question 71

William, who is a waiter, is injured when an unopened bottle of cola explodes in his hand while he is putting it into the restaurant's cooler.If William wants to sue the bottling company for his injuries:

A)he will lose, because it will be impossible for him to prove that the bottle was overpressurized by the bottler.
B)he will lose, because the bottling company has no duty to him.
C)he will probably win if the court allows him to use the res ipsa loquitur doctrine.
D)he will win based on the last clear chance rule.

Question 72

Stan doesn't like having neighborhood teenagers walk across his yard at night.He rigs an animal trap on the path the teenagers usually use to cross his land.One night, Tim and his friends are walking across the yard when Tim gets caught in the trap.He is taken to the hospital for his injuries.In this case:

A)Tim is a trespasser on Stan's property and therefore Stan has the right to use a trap to strongly discourage anyone from trespassing.
B)Stan has no duty toward Tim.
C)Stan is not free to inflict intentional injury on a trespasser.
D)All of the above.

Question 73

In determining the duty of care owed by a defendant using the reasonable person standard, the court will consider which of the following factors?

A)The existence of emergency conditions.
B)A physician's training and years of experience.
C)A person's severe mental retardation.
D)(a) and (b), but not (c).

Question 74

If a statute is found to be applicable to a fact situation, then the courts will hold that an unexcused violation of that statute which causes an injury to another is:

A)strict liability.
B)res ipsa loquitur.
C)negligence per se.
D)assumption of the risk.

Question 75

The harshness of the contributory negligence doctrine has been mitigated by:

A)the last clear chance rule.
B)comparative negligence.
C)assumption of risk.
D)(a) and (b), but not (c).

Question 76

Sarina goes to Marlin's Department Store to look for clothes.The store happens to be in the process of remodeling, and there is a lot of clutter in the aisle.Sarina trips over the clutter and is injured.Sarina's status with regard to the store is that of:

A)licensee.
B)business visitor.
C)public invitee.
D)trespasser.

Question 77

The legal doctrine upon which Justice Cardozo based his decision in the Palsgraf case is the doctrine of:

A)res ipsa loquitur.
B)proximate cause and foreseeability.
C)negligence per se.
D)assumption of the risk.

Question 78

Seventeen-year-old Brice has just received his driver's license.He is driving a little too fast one day and slams into the back of another car, which has just stopped for a stop sign.Brice is:

A)engaging in an adult activity and will be held to the same standard as an adult.
B)a minor and will have no responsibility for his torts.
C)not responsible, but his parents are responsible for any torts he commits.
D)Two of the above, (b) and (c).

Question 79

Cal sprayed pesticide on his crops in a very careful manner on a windless day.Nevertheless, some of the pesticide spray fell on his neighbor's side of the fence and contaminated the cornmeal for the chickens.The chickens died and the neighbor sues.What is the likely result?

A)Cal is not liable because he was not negligent in his spraying operation.
B)Cal is not liable because the neighbor assumed the risk of damage to the feed by placing it so close to the fence.
C)Cal is liable because spraying pesticides is an abnormally dangerous activity.
D)Cal is not liable for the damage because of contributory negligence.

Question 80

A(n) __________ is a sudden, unexpected event calling for immediate action, that is considered when determining whether conduct was reasonable in a negligence lawsuit.

A)res ipsa loquitur.
B)duty to act.
C)emergency.
D)None of the above.