Deck 9: Negligence and Strict Liability

Question 1

When negligence per se applies,the plaintiff is required to show that a reasonable person would exercise a heightened duty of care toward the plaintiff.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

A defendant must be more than 25% at fault before the plaintiff can recover,according to the pure comparative negligence defense,

Answer 2

False

Question 3

Duty in a negligence case refers to ________.

A)A failure to live up to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to others.
B)An obligation to measure compensable losses suffered by the plaintiff.
C)The standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
D)Actual harm,or cause in fact,which resulted from a failure to live up to a standard of care.
E)Legal cause,or the extent to which the defendant is held responsible for actions that fall short of the standard of care.

Answer 3

C
Explanation: A)Duty refers to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
B)Duty refers to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
C)Duty refers to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
D)Duty refers to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
E)Duty refers to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.

Question 4

Which of the following was the result on appeal in John Coomer v.Kansas City Royals Baseball Team,the case in the text in which the plaintiff sued after being hit in the eye by a hotdog thrown into the stands by a team mascot during the "Hotdog Launch," a customary activity during games?

A)The court dismissed the case on the basis that through a click agreement the plaintiff expressly agreed not to sue for any injuries when ordering the tickets through the Internet.
B)The court affirmed a jury verdict in favor of the defense on the basis that the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury by hotdog because the tossing of the hotdogs was a customary event of which the plaintiff was or should have been aware before attending the game.
C)The court found that the jury was improperly instructed on the assumption of the risk defense and that the plaintiff did not assume the risk of injury by hotdog by attending the game.
D)The court affirmed a jury verdict finding for the defense on the basis that the plaintiff did not immediately report injuries to stadium officials.
E)The court dismissed the case on the basis that injuries at baseball games are an inherent part of the sport whether by baseball or by hotdog.

Question 5

A plaintiff in a negligence lawsuit may choose whether the plaintiff wishes pure comparative negligence or modified comparative negligence rules to be applied by the court.

Question 6

To use the assumption of the risk defense successfully,a defendant must prove that the plaintiff voluntarily and unreasonably encountered the risk of the actual harm the defendant caused.

Question 7

Negligent torts involve willfully refusing to exercise extraordinary care to protect another's person or property.

Question 8

Good Samaritan statutes impose liability upon people for refusing to stop at accident scenes.

Question 9

If a plaintiff cannot establish all four elements of a negligence claim,what result should the plaintiff expect?

A)The plaintiff can prevail at the discretion of the judge if the judge believes it is too difficult for the plaintiff to meet the burden of proof.
B)The plaintiff will be denied recovery only if the judge cannot subpoena the necessary witnesses to come and testify in court.
C)The plaintiff can prevail as long as the plaintiff successfully showed causation and damages,even if the plaintiff did not prove breach of duty.
D)The plaintiff will be denied recovery due to a failure to establish all four elements of a negligence case.
E)The plaintiff can prevail if the court believes the defendant should be punished for his conduct,even though a plaintiff could not establish all four elements of a negligence claim.

Question 10

Assumption of the risk is a doctrine which makes it easier for a plaintiff to prevail in a negligence lawsuit.

Question 11

Claudio,who has never had prior health issues,suddenly has a heart attack while driving.He runs over a student who is crossing the street,breaking her leg.Which of the following is true?

A)The student can recover only if the student can establish that the student did not have any medical insurance.
B)The student can recover upon a showing of injury.Nothing else is required.
C)The student can recover in an action for negligence only if it can be shown that Bob had insurance.
D)It is unlikely that the student can recover because the accident could not have been avoided even with reasonable care.
E)The student may recover only if the student can show that the student was in the marked crosswalk.

Question 12

The term strict liability refers to liability without fault.

Question 13

In some situations,the law specifies the duty of care one individual owes to another.

Question 14

Generally speaking,courts hold that landowners have a duty to protect individuals on their property.

Question 15

Res ipsa loquitor allows a judge or jury to infer that the defendant's negligence was,more likely than not,the cause of the plaintiff's harm.

Question 16

Which of the following must a plaintiff prove to win a negligence case?

A)Duty and causation only.
B)Duty,breach of duty,and causation,but not damages.
C)Duty,breach of duty,causation,and damages.
D)Breach of duty only.
E)Causation and damages.

Question 17

The severity of potential harm is a factor in determining whether a reasonable person would have owed a duty to others.

Question 18

Implied assumption of the risk occurs when the plaintiff expressly agrees,usually in a written contract,to assume the risk posed by the defendant's behavior.

Question 19

Three-quarters of the states remain contributory negligence states.

Question 20

When a plaintiff uses res ipsa loquitor,the plaintiff must show direct evidence of the defendant's lack of due care to prove the defendant's negligence was the cause of harm.

Question 21

Proximate cause is determined by ,in most states.

A)But-for causation
B)Strict liability
C)Actual cause
D)Common law
E)Foreseeability

Question 22

Which of the following refers to the extent to which,as a matter of policy,a defendant may be held liable for the consequences of his actions?

A)Significant cause.
B)Cause in fact.
C)Actual cause.
D)Legal cause.
E)Proximate cause.

Question 23

"But for" causation refers to which of the following?

A)Significant cause.
B)Legal cause.
C)Actual cause.
D)Constructive cause.
E)Proximate cause.

Question 24

Which of the following is not an example of a situation where a duty of care exists.

A)When you hire an employee and know the employee is in a dangerous situation.
B)When you hit someone with your car and injure the person.
C)When you are a landowner and invite someone onto your property.
D)When you are a business owner and customers enter company property.
E)When you walk by a stranger who is drowning in a lake in your neighborhood.

Question 25

A teenager plays Grand Theft Auto and runs over people in the game.The teen decides to recreate the game in real life,driving his vehicle up onto the sidewalk and running over two people.The victims pursue a claim against the maker of grand theft auto for negligence,arguing the game makers had a duty of care.Are the victims likely to prevail?

A)Yes because teenagers are impressionable and video game makers have a duty not to expose them to violence.
B)Yes,because the teen admitted Grand Theft Auto was his inspiration.
C)No,because courts have consistently found it is not foreseeable that playing certain video games or viewing certain websites would result in murder.
D)Yes,because studies have shown a link between violent video games and real-life violence.
E)No,because the game makers were not personally in the car at the time of the incident.

Question 26

A fan at a baseball stadium is hit by a baseball.Under what circumstances could the owner of the stadium be held liable for resulting injuries?

A)If the owner of the stadium was aware of a chance that a ball would strike a patron and failed to cancel the game,despite the risk.
B)In all circumstances where a ball hits game attendees,regardless of any other factors.
C)If the stadium owner took all cost-effective precautions but failed to take part in a multi-million dollar research effort to construct a robot to intercept foul balls.
D)If the baseball team was the home team and not the visiting team.
E)If the stadium owner failed to fulfill its duty to provide reasonable protection because there were no barriers or other measures taken to protect game attendees from being struck by the ball.

Question 27

Which of the following is sometimes referred to as proximate cause?

A)Legal cause.
B)Factual Cause.
C)Actual cause.
D)Significant cause.
E)Cause in fact.

Question 28

While out for a bike ride,Huifen sees a child playing alone and unsupervised near the road.Which of the following is true?

A)She must render assistance to the child only if she can do so without peril to herself.
B)She must come to the child's assistance only because a child is involved.
C)She must render assistance to the child only if she is acquainted with the child's parents.
D)Because the law holds that every U.S.citizen holds the duty to help a stranger in peril,she must come to the child's assistance.
E)She has no duty to render assistance to the child.

Question 29

Damages in a negligence case refers to ________.

A)A compensable loss suffered by the plaintiff.
B)The standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
C)Actual harm or cause in fact which resulted from a failure to live up to a standard of care.
D)Legal cause or the extent to which the defendant is held responsible for actions which fall short of the standard of care.
E)A failure to live up to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to others.

Question 30

Actual cause is also known as ________.

A)Legal cause
B)Cause in fact
C)Cause for certainty
D)Proximately related cause
E)Proximate cause

Question 31

Which of the following is not a consideration when courts attempt to determine whether a reasonable person would have owed a duty of care to others?

A)The intent of the defendant to cause the harm experienced by the plaintiff.
B)How socially beneficial the defendant's conduct was which posed the risk of harm
C)The severity of the harm
D)The likelihood of harm
E)The costs which would have been necessary to reduce the risk of harm.

Question 32

It is a generally accepted precaution for dentists to warn patients of risks and exercise extra caution if patients are on anticoagulants blood thinners)and must undergo dental procedures.A dentist fails to alert a patient who the dentist knows is on anticoagulants)of the risks of a procedure the patient is about to undergo that is dangerous to someone on blood thinners.The patient experiences near-fatal bleeding due to the procedure.The plaintiff decides to sue for malpractice but the dentist says he was unaware of the need to warn patients on blood thinners of possible risks.Is the dentist going to be successful in his defense?

A)Yes,as long as he can prove he did not know about the risks.
B)No because a professional cannot defend against a negligent suit by claiming ignorance of generally accepted principles in his or her field of expertise.
C)Yes,as long as he did not make any specific mistakes during the dental procedure.
D)Yes,as long as the dentist can prove that the risks are overstated.
E)Yes,because malpractice cases require intentional harm for a victim to prevail.

Question 33

Which of the following are elements of causation?

A)Actual cause and significant cause.
B)Actual cause and proximate cause.
C)Proximate cause and significant cause.
D)Actual cause and clear cause.
E)Proximate cause and real cause.

Question 34

The CEO of a peanut company knows that its products test positive for salmonella but sell the peanuts away.Consequences can include:

A)Only government-mandated bankruptcy and restructuring of the peanut company.
B)Potential criminal charges against the CEO,as well as lawsuits brought by injured victims.
C)Neither criminal nor civil prosecution because of assumption of the risks.
D)Only lawsuits brought by victims,and never criminal charges.
E)Only criminal prosecution of the CEO.

Question 35

Breach of duty in a negligence case refers to ________.

A)An obligation to measure compensable losses suffered by the plaintiff.
B)Actual harm,or cause in fact,which resulted from a failure to live up to a standard of care.
C)A failure to live up to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to others.
D)The standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
E)Legal cause,or the extent to which the defendant is held responsible for actions that fall short of the standard of care.

Question 36

The duty that a business owes to customers is best expressed by which of the following statements?

A)A business owes a negligence per se duty toward customers.
B)A business owes no duty to its customers other than to sell safe products.
C)A business owes an absolute duty to keep its customers safe and is strictly liable for any harm.
D)A business has a duty of care to protect their customers against foreseeable risks about which the owner knew or reasonably should have known.
E)A business only owes a minimal duty toward customers.

Question 37

Which of the following standards measures the way members of society expect an individual to act in a given situation.

A)Reasonable person
B)Above-average person
C)Reasonable accountability
D)Perfect accountability
E)Without error

Question 38

Kim negligently hits Lennithia with her car.Which of the following is true?

A)Kim has a duty to come to the aid of Lennithia only if no one else is willing to do so.
B)Kim has a duty to come to the aid of Lennithia only if police are not on the scene within a reasonable amount of time.
C)Kim has a duty to come to the aid of Lennithia because she negligently hit her.
D)Kim has no duty to come to the aid of Lennithia.
E)Kim has a duty to come to the aid of Lennithia only if Lennithia has no insurance.

Question 39

Which type of damages are NOT available when bringing an action for negligence?

A)Nominal damages.
B)Punitive damages
C)Compensatory.
D)Pain and suffering compensation.
E)Damages intended to reimburse a plaintiff for actual losses.

Question 40

Clients who feel that they have suffered damages as a result of a professional's breach of his or her duty of care can bring a negligence case against the professional referred to as a ________ case.

A)Malfeasance
B)Physician guilty
C)Malpractice
D)Mistake
E)Physician liability

Question 41

When would a defendant use the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur?

A)To allow the judge and jury to presume the plaintiff destroyed evidence.
B)To allow the judge and jury to infer that more likely than not,the defendant's negligence was not the cause of the plaintiff's harm.
C)To allow the judge and jury to presume the plaintiff is guilty of contributory negligence.
D)To allow the judge to hold the defendant liable under a strict liability theory.
E)To allow the judge and jury to infer that more likely than not,the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm,even though no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of due care existed.

Question 42

Assuming res ipsa loquitur is established,what is the effect of that doctrine?

A)The burden of proof shifts to the plaintiff.
B)The burden of proof rises to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
C)The burden of proof shifts to the defendant.
D)It requires a finding of negligence.
E)It prohibits a finding of negligence.

Question 43

Courts usually award punitive damages in cases in which the offender has committed ________.

A)A tort directly involving negligence per se
B)Gross negligence
C)Strict liability offense
D)Negligence
E)A res ipsa loquitur offense

Question 44

Which of the following aids plaintiffs in establishing negligence claims?

A)Only negligence per se
B)Res ipsa loquitur,negligence per se,and assumption of risk
C)Only assumption of risk
D)Res ipsa loquitur and negligence per se
E)Only res ipsa loquitur

Question 45

Which statement about negligence in Germany is true?

A)It focuses only on unconscious negligence.
B)Courts distinguish between conscious and unconscious negligence with defendants who have engaged in only conscious negligence being found not guilty.
C)Both mental and physical capabilities are taken into account in determining whether a defendant is negligent.
D)It is the same as the law of negligence in the United States.
E)It focuses only on conscious negligence.

Question 46

Under what circumstances are punitive damages awarded?

A)Only to punish the offender.
B)To punish the offender and to deter others from committing similar offenses.
C)To punish the offender,to deter others from committing similar offenses,and to reimburse a plaintiff for his or her losses.
D)Only to reimburse a plaintiff for his or her losses.
E)Only to deter others from committing similar offenses.

Question 47

Which of the following is a doctrine available to defendants whereby a defendant may avoid liability by establishing that the plaintiff voluntarily and unreasonably encountered the risk of the actual harm that the defendant caused?

A)Negligence per se.
B)Contributory negligence doctrine.
C)Res ipsa loquitur.
D)Last-clear-chance doctrine.
E)Assumption of the risk doctrine.

Question 48

Which of the following is an example of a dram shop act?

A)A statute which allows the selling of beer but not hard liquor.
B)A statute which requires bar owners to post a bond before opening for business in a jurisdiction.
C)A statute which requires bar owners to have a license before operating a bar.
D)A statute that prohibits any bars on certain streets in the jurisdiction.
E)A statute which allows bartenders and bar owners to be held liable for injuries caused by individuals who become intoxicated at the bar.

Question 49

Under which of the following does the court determine the percentage of fault of the defendant requiring that the defendant be more than 50% at fault before the plaintiff can recover?

A)Last-clear-chance.
B)Assumption of the risk.
C)Pure comparative negligence.
D)Modified comparative negligence.
E)Both modified comparative negligence and last-clear-chance.

Question 50

Which of the following is a doctrine that allows the plaintiff to recover damages despite proof of contributory negligence,as long as the defendant had a final clear opportunity to avoid the action that injured the plaintiff?

A)Assumption of risk.
B)Modified risk doctrine.
C)Modified comparative doctrine.
D)Last-clear-chance doctrine.
E)There is no such doctrine.

Question 51

What is the literal meaning of "negligence per se"?

A)Select negligence.
B)Allowable negligence.
C)Absolute wrongdoing.
D)Pure negligence.
E)Negligence in or of itself.

Question 52

In order to rely upon the defense of contributory negligence,what must a defendant prove?

A)Only that the plaintiff violated the last-clear-chance doctrine.
B)Only that the plaintiff's conduct fell below the standard of care needed to prevent unreasonable risk of harm.
C)That the plaintiff's conduct fell below the standard of care needed to prevent unreasonable risk of harm and also that the plaintiff's failure was a contributing cause to the plaintiff's injuries.
D)Only that a failure of the plaintiff was a contributing cause to the plaintiff's injury.
E)That the plaintiff's conduct fell below the standard of care needed to prevent unreasonable risk of harm;that the plaintiff's failure was a contributing cause to the plaintiff's injuries;and also that the plaintiff failed to abide by the last-clear-chance doctrine.

Question 53

Under which of the following does the court determine the percentage of the fault of the defendant with the defendant then being liable for that percentage of the plaintiff's damages,with no requirement that the defendant be more than 50% at fault?

A)Pure comparative negligence.
B)Modified comparative negligence.
C)Assumption of the risk.
D)Last-clear-chance.
E)Both modified comparative negligence and last-clear-chance.

Question 54

Which of the following is true regarding contributory negligence?

A)It was outlawed by a federal statute.
B)It was once available in all states but has been replaced in some states by the defense of comparative negligence.
C)The defense was once available in a few states but is not available in any state today.
D)It is available in all states today.
E)It was once available in all states and has been replaced in some states by the defense of assumption of risk.

Question 55

Which of the following damages are intended to reimburse a plaintiff for his or her losses?

A)Nominal.
B)Exemplary.
C)Compensatory.
D)Punitives.
E)Quantum.

Question 56

Which of the following is a plaintiff NOT required to demonstrate in order to be successful in making a claim under res ipsa loquitor?

A)The alleged negligence is within the scope of the defendant's duty to the plaintiff.
B)Other possible causes of the incident that harmed the plaintiff have been ruled out.
C)The event was of a kind that normally happens only if there is negligence.
D)There is direct evidence of the defendant's lack of care.
E)The event which caused harm was a kind of event that ordinarily does not occur.

Question 57

Why has the contributory negligence defense been replaced with a comparative negligence theory in most states?

A)Because of situations in which a defendant is released from liability based on the last clear chance doctrine when equity requires that the defendant bear at least some responsibility.
B)Because of situations in which a plaintiff is barred from recovery due to minimal contributory negligence.
C)In order to assist a defendant in defending against unfounded claims.
D)In order to assist a plaintiff in avoiding the assumption of the risk doctrine.
E)In order to assist a defendant in avoiding the assumption of the risk doctrine.

Question 58

Which of the following applies to cases in which the defendant has violated a statute enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs?

A)Comparative negligence.
B)Statutory shop act.
C)Negligence per se.
D)Assumption of the risk.
E)Res ipsa loquitur.

Question 59

What is the final required element of a negligence action?

A)Proving reasonableness.
B)Seeking damages.
C)Arguing assumption of the risk.
D)A defendant paying a prevailing plaintiff's legal fees.
E)Receiving punitive damages.

Question 60

Darryl is jaywalking in a jurisdiction that applies contributory negligence.Slick sees Darryl in the street,notices that he is not in the crosswalk,and proceeds to hit Darryl with his vehicle because he believes that Darryl should be taught a lesson about how to cross the street.Slick does slow down somewhat and only causes Darryl some significant bruising,but Darryl is angry and sues.Which of the following is most likely to happen in a contributory negligence jurisdiction?

A)Darryl will be able to recover despite proof of contributory negligence on his part because Slick had a final clear opportunity to avoid the action that injured Darryl.
B)Slick will not be held liable because Darryl was contributorily negligent.
C)Darryl will lose because Slick,at least,reduced his speed.
D)Darryl will win because of comparative negligence.
E)Slick will win because of the assumption of risk doctrine based upon the fact that Darryl committed an offense by crossing the street where he did in violation of clearly defined law.

Question 61

What was the final result on appeal in the Case Opener involving whether the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied to the lawsuit brought against landowners after the plaintiff fell through a wooden dock located on the defendants' property?

A)That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply because it only applies in contractual cases.
B)That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied.
C)That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply because there was insufficient proof that the type of accident at issue would not normally happen in the absence of negligence.
D)That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply because there was insufficient proof that the dock at issue was in the exclusive control of the defendants.
E)That whether or not the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied should be decided by the jury.

Question 62

[Diving Fiasco] Rogerio,who owns a dive shop in the U.S. ,takes a group of his customers diving in U.S.waters.Rogerio is aware that the area where the divers will be visiting is occasionally visited by sharks.He is also aware that,while sting rays are usually tame,they can become aggressive when fed.Rogerio did not reveal the information about sharks or sting rays to the group of divers going with him because,in his experience,as soon as customers hear of a hint of danger,they refuse to pay and go on the trip.The divers go down into the water,and some have squid with which to feed the sting rays.During the dive,one of the sting rays becomes agitated and lashes diver Tamika's arm.Tamika is so disconcerted that she drops her regulator her breathing device)from her mouth and is in considerable distress.Another diver,Billy,encounters a shark which snaps at him.Fortunately,the shark does not bite him but does damage his diving equipment.He is also in distress.Rogerio,who is in charge of the dive,does nothing and just returns to the boat because the dive turned out to be more trouble than expected.Claudia,another diver on the trip,also returns to the boat without doing anything to help the divers in distress.Sam,on the other hand,goes to rescue the divers who are in distress.He manages to assist them,but in the process,he injures his back and requires medical care.All divers return to the boat and are very unhappy with Rogerio.
The diver whose equipment was damaged because of the shark incident,Billy,wants to sue Rogerio for damages.Which of the following is the most likely result?

A)Billy will lose because Rogerio had no duty to warn him of anything.
B)Billy will lose because he did not sustain physical injury.
C)Billy will win because Rogerio should have warned him about the occasional appearance of sharks.
D)Billy will win only if he can establish that he had a contract with Rogerio whereby Rogerio agreed to reveal harmful conditions.
E)Billy will win only if he can establish that he did not have insurance to cover the equipment.

Question 63

Which of the following is an example of an inherently dangerous activity?

A)Dynamite blasting in a populated area.
B)Babysitting.
C)Operating an airplane.
D)Driving a vehicle.
E)Burning trash.

Question 64

Is Teresa the proximate cause of the bank burning?

A)Teresa is not the proximate case of the accident because her actions were not the cause in fact of the accident.
B)Teresa's actions were the proximate cause of the bank's burning because actual cause is present.
C)Teresa's actions were not the proximate cause of the accident because actual causation cannot be established since it was foreseeable that gas can result in a fire.
D)Teresa's actions were the proximate cause of the bank's burning because cause in fact can be established.
E)Teresa is not the proximate cause of the bank burning because it was not foreseeable that Devin would have gas in the back of her pick-up truck that would result in such a fire.

Question 65

In reference to the case in the text,Ex Parte Emmette L.Barran,III,what was the result after the plaintiff sued the national and local Kappa Alpha organization following hazing activities?

A)The court dismissed the lawsuit on the basis that the plaintiff assumed the risk of harm.
B)The court ruled that under pure contributive negligence principles,the plaintiff was entitled to recover.
C)The court ruled that under pure comparative negligence principles,the plaintiff was entitled to recover.
D)The court dismissed the case on the basis of negligence per se.
E)The court ruled that under modified comparative negligence principles,the plaintiff was entitled to recover.

Question 66

Why do superseding causes allow defendants to avoid liability?

A)Superseding causes are an example of the res ipsa loquitor defense.
B)Superseding causes are evidence that a defendant's duty of care was fulfilled and thus no negligence occurred.
C)Superseding causes are evidence that a defendant's breach of duty was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.
D)Superseding causes demonstrate the plaintiff was actually responsible for his own injuries.
E)Superseding causes do not allow defendants to avoid liability

Question 67

Which of the following is true regarding negligence under South African Law?

A)South Africa's legal system is a combination of selected legal traditions involving Roman,Dutch,and French law,but not German law.
B)South African law refuses to recognize sudden emergency as a standard for determining negligence in crisis situations.
C)Under South African law,individuals can be found negligent in only one way,through failing to exercise reasonable care.
D)South African law models the law of the U.S.and is substantially the same.
E)South African law recognizes that one way to determine negligence is by determining whether the defendant could have prevented the consequent damages.

Question 68

Did Rogerio have a duty to provide assistance to Tamika and Billy during the dive?

A)Rogerio had a duty to come to their assistance only if no one else did so.
B)Rogerio had a duty to come to their assistance only if they were minors.
C)Rogerio had a duty to come to their assistance only if he had specifically agreed to do so prior to the dive.
D)Rogerio had a duty to come to their aid because he arranged the dive and was charging them.
E)Rogerio had no duty to provide any assistance to them.

Question 69

Which of the following occurs when a plaintiff expressly agrees,usually in a written contract,to assume the risk posed by the defendant's behavior?

A)Express assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
B)Implied assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
C)Implied assumption of the risk.
D)Assumption by incident.
E)Express assumption of the risk.

Question 70

Which of the following is a condition required for the imposition of strict liability?

A)The activity is undertaken by a minor.
B)The activity is heavily regulated.
C)The activity involves trespassing in a way that reasonably leads to fright on the part of home owners.
D)The activity is so inherently dangerous that it cannot ever be safely undertaken.
E)The activity involves negligence pertaining to the preparation of food products.

Question 71

Which is the most difficult part of establishing the defense of assumption of the risk?

A)Showing that the plaintiff signed the contract assuming the risk without duress.
B)Showing a lack of contributory conduct on the part of other defendants.
C)Showing that the plaintiff was aware of applicable law.
D)Showing that the plaintiff assumed the risk of the actual harm suffered.
E)Showing that the defendant was aware that the plaintiff assumed the risk.

Question 72

Did Claudia and Sam have a duty to aid the divers in peril?

A)Claudia and Sam had a duty to go to the aid of the divers in peril only if Rogerio refused to do so.
B)Claudia and Sam had a duty to assist the divers in peril only if they were acquainted prior to the dive with the divers who were in peril.They had no duty to help strangers.
C)Claudia and Sam did not have a duty to go to the aid of the divers in peril unless they were the first to see the problem.
D)Neither Claudia nor Sam had a duty to go to the aid of the divers who were in peril.
E)Sam and Claudia had a duty to help the divers who were in peril if personal safety was involved but not if the only issue was damage to property.

Question 73

Is Rogerio is liable for the injuries Sam sustained in coming to the rescue of the divers in distress?

A)Rogerio is liable for Sam's injuries under the danger invites rescue doctrine.
B)Rogerio is liable for Sam's injuries only if he made them worse by not getting Sam medical attention on a timely basis.
C)Rogerio is not liable for Sam's injuries because the shark attack constituted a superseding cause of the injuries.
D)Rogerio is not liable for Sam's injuries because Sam had no legal duty to come to the aid of the other divers.
E)Rogerio is not liable for Sam's injuries because Sam assumed the risk of harm.

Question 74

[Blow Up] Devin has several full gas cans in the bed of her pick-up truck,because she runs a landscaping company and needs the gas for her mowers.On the way home from the gas station,Devin stops at her bank and exits her truck.Teresa pulls behind her and negligently rear-ends Devin's pick-up.The truck explodes and results in the bank building burning to the ground.The bank sues Teresa for negligence claiming that Teresa should have to pay for the entire bank building.The bank claims that it should be able to recover under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine.
Does actual cause exist in the bank's action against Teresa?

A)Actual cause is present because Teresa was the legal cause of the bank burning.
B)Actual cause is not present because Teresa is not the proximate cause of the bank burning.
C)Actual cause is present because as a matter of policy,it is believed that someone who rear-ends a vehicle should be responsible for damages.
D)Actual causation would exist because the bank would not have been burnt down if Teresa had fulfilled her duty to drive properly.
E)Actual cause is not present because Teresa is not the legal cause of the bank burning.

Question 75

On a vacation holiday,Anne decides to rent a fishing boat.She is asked to sign a contract stipulating that the defendant will not be held responsible for any boating accidents.If Anne signs,this is an example of:

A)Assumption by incident.
B)Implied assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
C)Express assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
D)Express assumption of the risk.
E)Implied assumption of the risk.

Question 76

What is the term for when a plaintiff implicitly assumes a known risk?

A)Express assumption of the risk.
B)Implied assumption of the risk.
C)Assumption by incident.
D)Express assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
E)Implied assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.

Question 77

Which of the following is liability without fault?

A)Homeowner liability.
B)Assumption of the risk.
C)Storekeeper liability.
D)Negligence.
E)Strict liability.

Question 78

Which of the following are laws holding that people in peril who receive voluntary aid from others cannot hold those offering aid liable for negligence?

A)Rescue statutes.
B)Freedom statutes.
C)All clear statutes.
D)Aid to others statutes.
E)Good Samaritan statutes.

Question 79

Which of the following is an unforeseeable event which interrupts the causal chain between the defendant's breach of duty and the damages the plaintiff suffered?

A)A relative cause
B)A superseding cause
C)A surprise event
D)Assumption of the risk
E)An unusual cause

Question 80

Louisa decides to go on a zip line adventure.She signs a contract before she begins to go on the zip line,which says that she assumes the risks of accident or injury.While walking up the steps to grab the zip line,Louisa falls down due to a broken hand rail on the stairs.Could the property owner be held responsible?

A)Yes because she had not yet started zip lining but after she actually grabbed the line,the company would no longer be held responsible.
B)Yes,because a fall due to a faulty handrail was not the type of risk Louisa thought she was assuming.
C)No because of Louisa's implied assumption of the risk.
D)No because Louisa fell on her own.
E)No because of Louisa's express assumption of the risk.