Deck 7: Negligence and Strict Liability

Question 1

Res ipsa loquitur means "the thing speaks for itself."

Answer 1

True

Question 2

To recover in a negligence suit, a plaintiff must prove that the:

A) defendant had intent to injure the plaintiff and did so by a breach of duty.
B) defendant's breach of duty was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.
C) defendant's breach of duty might have indirectly caused the plaintiff injuries.
D) defendant's actions did not violate any statutes.

Answer 2

B
Explanation: A plaintiff in a negligence suit must prove several things to recover (1) that the defendant had a duty not to injure the plaintiff, (2) that the defendant breached the duty, and (3) that the defendant's breach of duty was the actual and proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.

Question 3

People who do not conform to a statute are sometimes considered to be negligent per se. This means that:

A) the defendant should be penalized even if the negligence did not cause the plaintiff any harm.
B) negligence and breaking a law should be penalized equally.
C) not knowing about a statutory requirement is not as bad as intending to do something wrong.
D) statutes can create the legal duty required to establish negligence.

Answer 3

D
Explanation: Statutes establish duties, among other things. Generally, people who do not do what a statute requires are considered to be negligent per se because they are not acting as a "reasonable person" would.

Question 4

Courts are increasingly allowing third parties to recover for emotional distress resulting from witnessing harm caused to another person by the defendant's negligent acts.

Question 5

Jose, a migrant worker who lived in a mobile home, died in a fire. The smoke alarm of the mobile home malfunctioned and did not go off. He was trapped inside while the fire engulfed him. The state had a law that required dwellings to be equipped with smoke detectors and that they be maintained. In this scenario, Jose's widow can sue the owner of the mobile home under _____.

A) disparagement
B) negligence
C) libel
D) causation

Question 6

If Jamal is carefully driving his car within the speed limit and an inebriated Eddie darts into Jamal's car and is hit, Jamal is liable for Eddie's injuries.

Question 7

Negligent persons are not generally liable for injuries sustained by those who are injured while making reasonable attempts to avoid being injured by the negligent person's acts.

Question 8

(p. 130
Contributory negligence is not a good defense to recklessness, but assumption of risk is a good defense.

Question 9

The Restatement (Second) of Torts suggests that negligent defendants should be liable for injuries that, if one looks backward after the accident, appear to be "highly extraordinary."

Question 10

A plaintiff in a negligence suit must prove that the defendant's breach of duty was the remote cause of the plaintiff's injuries.

Question 11

A negligent person is liable only for the proximate results of his or her negligence.

Question 12

Under the doctrine of strict liability, care and caution mitigate liability.

Question 13

A person is guilty of breach of duty if he or she exposes another person to a foreseeable, unreasonable risk of harm, something the "reasonable person" would never do.

Question 14

Which of the following is true about the breach of duty?

A) A person is guilty of breach of duty if he or she exposes another person to a foreseeable and unreasonable risk of harm.
B) The defendant is liable for the plaintiff's injury even if the defendant exercised reasonable care.
C) Only when the defendant's actions violate statutes, it is regarded as breach of duty.
D) In a ruling, a breach of duty is considered as serious as a criminal offense.

Question 15

If the defendant had exclusive control of the thing that caused the injury, and the injury that occurred would not ordinarily happen in the absence of negligence, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur creates an inference of negligence.

Question 16

A plaintiff in a negligence suit must prove that the defendant had a duty not to injure the plaintiff.

Question 17

Negligence is an intentional breach of duty that may or may not result in harm to another.

Question 18

The idea of placing a legal limit on the extent of a negligent person's liability is called proximate cause.

Question 19

One basic principle of causation is that negligent defendants "take their victims as they find them." This means that if some physical peculiarity of a person aggravates his or her injuries, the defendant is liable for the full extent of the injuries.

Question 20

The law of negligence holds our behavior up to a(n) _____ standard of conduct.

A) objective
B) strict liability
C) subjective
D) criminal

Question 21

Under a pure comparative negligence system, plaintiffs _____.

A) that share the fault with the defendant will not be able to recover
B) are able to recover the portion of their losses not attributable to their fault
C) are barred from recovery if they are as much or more at fault for their injuries as the defendant
D) are able to recover for the full extent of losses from the defendant even if they were well aware of the risks involved

Question 22

When a defendant's behavior indicates a "conscious disregard for a known high degree of probable harm to another," the defendant is guilty of _____.

A) strict liability
B) recklessness
C) absolute liability
D) negligence

Question 23

Which of the following statements is true for assumption of risk?

A) It is not a defense in cases based on strict liability.
B) It is not a defense in cases based on reckless behavior.
C) It dictates that the person assuming responsibility will have to recover for all people involved in the accident.
D) It bars the plaintiff's recovery as the plaintiff fully understands the nature and extent of the risk involved.

Question 24

Which of the following statements is true about recklessness?

A) Assumption of risk is not a good defense for recklessness.
B) It is best defended with a plea of contributory negligence.
C) It is more morally objectionable than negligence but less than intentional wrongdoing.
D) It is identical to intentional wrongdoing.

Question 25

Which of the following statements is true for both contributory negligence and assumption of the risk?

A) They are defenses adopted to ease the harshness of the comparative negligence system.
B) They are recent defenses to recklessness but not negligence.
C) They are based on the idea that everyone has a duty to exercise reasonable care for his or her own safety.
D) They are based on the idea that the plaintiff may recover if the defendant had the last opportunity to avoid harm.

Question 26

Rachel saw her sister Rebecca being hit by a car. She rushed to help her and later accompanied her to the hospital. Unfortunately, several hours later her sister died. Rachel, who received psychiatric treatment as a result of the traumatic experience, sued the car driver for emotional distress. Which of the following is most likely to be true in this case?

A) Rachel is not entitled to recovery because she was not in the "zone of danger" created by the negligent act.
B) The courts will allow recovery for battery because Rachel is related to the victim of the accident.
C) The courts will not allow recovery because Rachel suffered only emotional trauma with no visible signs of physical injury.
D) Rachel will be awarded recovery because she bore witness to the accident during which her sister was killed.

Question 27

Benjamin's negligent act injures Judith. Naomi, Judith's friend, breaks her arm while attempting to come to Judith's aid. Benjamin is most likely to be liable for harm to _____.

A) only Judith
B) only Naomi
C) both Judith and Naomi
D) neither Judith nor Naomi

Question 28

Bella is Ming's babysitter. She takes Ming to the amusement park for a roller coaster ride. Due to the intensity of the ride, Ming, who has an especially weak heart, dies of a heart attack during the ride. Which of the following concepts best fits Bella's act of negligence?

A) Proximate cause
B) Negligence per se
C) Breach of duty
D) Principles of causation

Question 29

Emmy worked late nights at a convenience store. One night, Emmy discovered that the "emergency alert" security system was not working. The owner of the store told her that he would have the system repaired immediately. Nevertheless, a month went by before the system was repaired. In the meantime, the store was robbed while Emmy was working and, in the course of the robbery, the perpetrator broke Emmy's leg. Under these circumstances, if Emmy presses charges, she is most likely to recover from the store owner:

A) for negligence because the harm was foreseeable.
B) for battery because his inaction was the reason for her injury.
C) for intentional tort.
D) only for emotional distress.

Question 30

Which of the following is true about the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur?

A) It says that an act of negligence and a criminal offense should be treated with the same weight.
B) It puts the burden on the plaintiff to show that the injury was not caused by his or her negligence.
C) It is applicable to cases where the defendant has exclusive control of the thing that caused the injury and is reluctant to disclose facts that prove liability.
D) It offers protection to those who are injured while making a reasonable attempt to rescue someone endangered by the negligent person's act.

Question 31

Negligent persons are generally held jointly liable (along with the negligent physician) for negligent medical care their victims receive for their injuries. This is true according to:

A) the general causation rules.
B) res ipsa loquitur.
C) intentional tort.
D) proximate cause.

Question 32

Reuben and Priya meet with an accident and get injured. Priya is 25 percent at fault for her injuries, and Reuben is 75 percent at fault for his injuries. Which of the following would be true under a pure comparative negligence system?

A) Priya could recover for 60 percent of her damages.
B) Priya could recover for 40 percent of her damages.
C) Priya could recover for 75 percent of her damages.
D) Priya will not be able to recover because she was also responsible for the accident.

Question 33

Martin works as a pizza delivery person. He parks his bike outside Regalia Inc. to deliver an order. Meanwhile, a damaged book rack in Regalia, which is situated on the first floor of the building, falls down through an open window and crashes on his bike. However, no one admits to having seen the rack fall. Can Martin recover against Regalia for negligence?

A) Martin can recover only if he finds a witness who saw the book rack crashing on the bike.
B) Martin can recover if he can prove that book racks do not fall out of windows in the absence of negligence and that Regalia Inc. had exclusive control of the rack prior to the fall.
C) Martin will be unable to recover because parking under an open floor window amounts to contributory negligence and he is therefore liable for the accident too.
D) Martin will be unable to recover because parking under an open window amounts to assumption of risk.

Question 34

In addition to demonstrating actual emotional distress, if a third party wants to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff must primarily show that:

A) the defendant was negligent and that the accident could have been avoided.
B) the third party is at least distantly related to the victim.
C) the third party actually witnessed the injury when it occurred.
D) the defendant did not try to stop the accident.

Question 35

An intervening force, which happens after the defendant's negligent act and contributes to the plaintiff's injury, can excuse the defendant from liability if it:

A) could have been anticipated.
B) was proximate.
C) was unforeseeable.
D) was an intentional tort and not an unintentional one.

Question 36

If Nancy steps into the path of George's speeding car without checking to see whether any cars are coming, her _____ might prevent her from receiving damages for her injuries from George.

A) comparative negligence
B) breach of duty
C) assumption of risk
D) contributory negligence

Question 37

Violetta was injured in a bike accident while on a ride with Alfredo, who she knew was intoxicated. A court would regard this as:

A) contributory negligence.
B) assumption of the risk.
C) last clear chance.
D) comparative negligence.

Question 38

Which of the following is a general negligence causation rule?

A) The defendant is liable for the full extent of the injuries of a person even if some physical peculiarity of that person aggravated his or her injuries.
B) The defendant is not liable for those who make reasonable attempts to avoid being injured by his or her acts.
C) The defendant is unaccountable for those who are injured while making a reasonable attempt to rescue someone endangered by his or her act.
D) The defendant is generally not held liable for diseases the victims contract while weakened by their injuries.

Question 39

Penny had carelessly left marbles on the steps of her house. When Bijou came to visit, she broke her leg by slipping on those marbles and severely damaged her spine. While in the hospital recovering from her fall, her body being weak from all the antibiotics, readily contracted a viral infection. Under these circumstances, Penny is most likely to be liable:

A) only for the damage to Bijou resulting from her fall.
B) only for Bijou's viral infection.
C) for injuries sustained by Bijou and also for the viral infection.
D) for neither problems because Bijou should have been careful.

Question 40

The doctrine of _____ holds that even though the plaintiff was negligent, he or she can still recover if it can be shown that the defendant had the final opportunity to avoid the harm.

A) last clear chance
B) negligence per se
C) comparative negligence
D) strict liability

Question 41

Describe strict liability

Question 42

_____ is a good defense to recklessness.

A) Assumption of risk
B) Intentional tort
C) Contributory negligence
D) Comparative negligence

Question 43

Briefly describe the main defenses to negligence.

Question 44

While fishing in a lake, George anchored his new motorboat and went ashore to make an important phone call. He accidently left the key in the boat and Jeb stole the boat. While driving the boat recklessly, Jeb hit Angela, who was water skiing and severely injured her. Should George be responsible for Angela's injuries?

Question 45

Which of the following is a correct statement regarding strict liability?

A) Strict liability is commonly described as "liability with fault."
B) The most recent major application of strict liability is to the manufacturers of defective products that are "unreasonably dangerous."
C) The basic idea behind strict liability is that the risks associated with certain activities should be borne by an innocent person who has suffered loss.
D) Generally speaking, negligence is a good defense to strict liability suits.

Question 46

One night, when Henry got home and flipped on the light switch, the kitchen exploded, leaving him severely injured. The explosion was caused by a failure of the gas connector, which allowed a large amount of gas to escape, and a small spark created by turning on the light caused it to explode. Henry sued the gas corporation, arguing that it knew the connector was defective but it did not warn its customers. Henry won the case. He is most likely to have won the lawsuit on the grounds of:

A) negligence per se.
B) recklessness.
C) strict liability.
D) breach of duty.

Question 47

In an act of recklessness, Ryan bets his friends that he can drive down a crowded street blindfolded, and he ends up striking Cameron. Under which of the following circumstances would Cameron be barred from any recovery from Ryan?

A) If Cameron had not looked before stepping into Ryan's path
B) If Cameron had bet Ryan's friends he could run in front of Ryan without being hit
C) If Cameron was mildly intoxicated while walking
D) If Cameron could hear Ryan's car approaching but had no place to hide

Question 48

Ultrahazardous activities:

A) are defined only by international statutes.
B) are subject to strict liability.
C) only create liability where the defendant fails to act as a reasonable person.
D) only create liability when the defendant fails to exercise utmost care.

Question 49

What does it mean to say that negligent defendants "take their victims as they find them?"