Question 1

Fact Pattern 9-2
Blake lives in a jurisdiction that applies joint and several liability along with the doctrine of contribution. He was involved in a very unfortunate motor vehicle accident. Tony hit Blake's new Mercedes in the rear just as Cathy crossed the center line and sideswiped him. Blake's car was severely damaged, and Blake suffered from whiplash for a few weeks. Blake sued both Tony and Cathy. It was determined at trial that both Tony and Cathy were negligent, that Blake was not negligent, that Tony was 60% responsible for Blake's injuries, that Cathy was 40% responsible for Blake's injuries, and that Blake's total damages were $100,000.
-Refer to fact pattern 9-2. Assuming she has the financial resources or sufficient insurance,can Blake recover the entire $100,000 from Cathy?

Accepted Answer

Since joint and several liability is in effect in Blake's jurisdiction, she can recover the entire $100,000 from either Tony or Cathy, regardless of their percentage of fault, as long as they have the financial resources or sufficient insurance. In this case, Cathy was found to be 40% responsible, so she can be held liable for the full amount if she has the ability to pay.

Question 2

Under the doctrine of _______ liability,once the court determines that multiple defendants are at fault,the plaintiff may collect the entire judgment from any one of them,regardless of the degree of that defendant's fault.

Accepted Answer

Joint and several liability means that each defendant is individually responsible for the entire amount of the judgment, regardless of their degree of fault. This allows the plaintiff to collect from any one defendant or a combination of defendants, giving them a better chance of collecting the full amount awarded.

Question 3

Which of the following is the best defense to negligence?

Accepted Answer

The best defense to negligence is contributory negligence. If the plaintiff contributed to their own injuries, they cannot recover damages or will receive a reduced amount of damages. The other options (A, B, and C) are irrelevant to the defense of negligence.

Question 4

Paul is suing Dan for negligence arising out of a boating accident.What are the elements that Paul must prove in order to win his case? Discuss fully.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Paul is suing Dan for negligence arising...

Question 5

Under the doctrine of ________,the plaintiff may recover only the proportionate amount of damages attributable to the defendant's negligence

Accepted Answer

Under the doctrine of comparative negligence, the plaintiff may still recover damages from the defendant, but the amount of damages will be reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to the plaintiff. This is different from the doctrine of contributory negligence, which bars the plaintiff from recovering any damages if they are found to have contributed to their own injury in any way. Contribution and indemnity are related to the allocation of fault among multiple defendants, but not to the plaintiff's own negligence.

Question 6

John has just learned that the latest issue of The Blurb,the local school newspaper,has referred to him as a "liar,cheat,and a lousy student." In fact,John is only a lousy student; he is a very honest person.Explain in detail what theory John can use to recover damages from The Blurb.What defenses are available to the newspaper?

Accepted Answer

The answer of John has just learned that the latest...

Question 7

A court order prohibiting a defendant from continuing a certain activity would be called a(n)_________.

Accepted Answer

An injunction is a court order that prohibits a defendant from continuing a certain activity. An indictment is a formal accusation of a crime. An edict is a formal proclamation or order issued by a government or leader. A due care order is not a commonly used legal term.

Question 8

Fact Pattern 9-1
Frank belongs to the same country club as his former physician, Dr. Bozo. Frank recently started dating Dr. Bozo's former wife, Alice, and decided to find a new physician. Frank found out that Dr. Bozo has been telling their mutual friends at the club about Frank's high blood pressure and problems with anxiety. Frank is very angry, confronts Dr. Bozo on the golf course, and tells him that he is going to sue him under a federal law protecting medical information. Dr. Bozo laughs and says in front of a number of Frank's golfing buddies, "I'm not surprised that you're going nuts and that you have high blood pressure - hanging out with Alice has done that to many a man.
-Refer to fact pattern 9-1. What right of action,if any,would Frank have against Dr.Bozo?

Accepted Answer

Frank could likely prevail in a common law action for the public disclosure of private facts, as Dr. Bozo disclosed private medical information without consent.

Question 9

Minerva told Prudence that Prudence could park her farm tractor on Minerva's land but only for one month. Two months later,Minerva is annoyed because the farm tractor is still on her land; and Prudence refuses to move it. Which of the following causes of action,if any,would Minerva have against Prudence?

Accepted Answer

Prudence was only given permission to park her farm tractor on Minerva's land for one month. By keeping it on the land for two months without Minerva's permission, Prudence is committing trespass. Nuisance and negligence do not apply in this scenario.

Question 10

Define and explain the theory behind the economic loss rule.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Define and explain the theory behind the...

Question 11

Blastco is an expert demolition company.During the process of leveling some land,Blastco fell behind in their schedule and used twice the normal amount of dynamite to blast some hills.When a charge exploded,the blast broke several of the windows in Paul's home.Paul lives near the blast site.What theory or theories may Paul use to recover damages from Blastco? Discuss fully.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Blastco is an expert demolition company.During the...

Question 12

Bill,a student at State University,needed a way to get some cash quickly. He took a photograph of State University's head cheerleader,Marla,and started selling jerseys with her photograph on the back under the caption of "She's Hot." Marla wants to sue for defamation. She asks you if she could win on a defamation claim and if there is anything else for which she should sue. Discuss the elements of the legal theories involved and what you should tell Marla.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Bill,a student at State University,needed a way...

Question 13

Under which of the following systems may a plaintiff recover for any amount of the defendant's negligence,even if the plaintiff was the more negligent party?

Accepted Answer

Under pure comparative negligence, a plaintiff can recover damages from the defendant even if the plaintiff was more negligent. The damages are reduced based on the percentage of the plaintiff's own negligence, but there is no bar to recovery as long as the defendant is also found to have some degree of fault.

Question 14

Fact Pattern 9-2
Blake lives in a jurisdiction that applies joint and several liability along with the doctrine of contribution. He was involved in a very unfortunate motor vehicle accident. Tony hit Blake's new Mercedes in the rear just as Cathy crossed the center line and sideswiped him. Blake's car was severely damaged, and Blake suffered from whiplash for a few weeks. Blake sued both Tony and Cathy. It was determined at trial that both Tony and Cathy were negligent, that Blake was not negligent, that Tony was 60% responsible for Blake's injuries, that Cathy was 40% responsible for Blake's injuries, and that Blake's total damages were $100,000.
-Refer to fact pattern 9-2. Assume Tony or his insurer pays the entire amount and then attempts to recoup amounts from Cathy. Could Cathy be held liable for any amounts?

Accepted Answer

In a jurisdiction that applies joint and several liability along with the doctrine of contribution, Tony or his insurer can seek payment from Cathy for her proportional share of the damages, which is 40% in this case. This is because contribution allows each defendant to be held liable for their percentage of fault in the accident. Therefore, choice A is the best answer.

Question 15

Fact Pattern 9-3
Alex and Blake got into a heated argument because Alex asked Blake's girlfriend out on a date. Blake decided that he wanted to scare Alex and drew back his fist to hit Alex. He stopped just as he was about to strike Alex in the nose. Alex yelled out, "You didn't scare me. I was ready for a fight!" Later, Alex decides that he would like to sue Blake and asks your advice on issues involving assault and battery.
-Refer to fact pattern 9-3. What would you tell Alex regarding whether he should sue Alex for committing a battery?

Accepted Answer

Battery requires actual physical contact or harm, which did not occur in this scenario as Blake did not strike Alex.

Question 16

The _________ doctrine imposes liability for physical injury to child trespassers caused by artificial conditions on the land.

Accepted Answer

The doctrine of attractive nuisance imposes liability on landowners for physical injury to child trespassers caused by artificial conditions on the land that are inherently dangerous and likely to attract children who cannot appreciate the risk. This doctrine often applies in cases involving swimming pools, machinery, or abandoned structures. Negligence per se involves the violation of a statute or regulation, foreseeable trespasser refers to a class of persons who, although not invited or licensed, are reasonably expected to come onto the land, and respondeat superior refers to the legal responsibility of an employer for the actions of its employees.

Question 17

Fact Pattern 9-1
Frank belongs to the same country club as his former physician, Dr. Bozo. Frank recently started dating Dr. Bozo's former wife, Alice, and decided to find a new physician. Frank found out that Dr. Bozo has been telling their mutual friends at the club about Frank's high blood pressure and problems with anxiety. Frank is very angry, confronts Dr. Bozo on the golf course, and tells him that he is going to sue him under a federal law protecting medical information. Dr. Bozo laughs and says in front of a number of Frank's golfing buddies, "I'm not surprised that you're going nuts and that you have high blood pressure - hanging out with Alice has done that to many a man.
-Refer to fact pattern 9-1. Is there any federal law prohibiting Dr.Bozo from revealing Frank's medical history?

Accepted Answer

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) prohibits health care providers from revealing private medical information without the patient's consent. While Dr. Bozo is no longer Frank's physician, he still has a duty to protect Frank's medical information and could face legal action for violating HIPAA. The other options mentioned do not exist.

Question 18

Fact Pattern 9-3
Alex and Blake got into a heated argument because Alex asked Blake's girlfriend out on a date. Blake decided that he wanted to scare Alex and drew back his fist to hit Alex. He stopped just as he was about to strike Alex in the nose. Alex yelled out, "You didn't scare me. I was ready for a fight!" Later, Alex decides that he would like to sue Blake and asks your advice on issues involving assault and battery.
-Refer to fact pattern 9-3. What would you tell Alex regarding whether he should sue Blake for committing an assault?

Accepted Answer

Alex could potentially succeed in an action against Blake for assault if he can show that he reasonably apprehended being struck. The fact that he claimed to be ready for a fight does not necessarily negate his claim of apprehension.

Question 19

Which of the following is true regarding the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act?

Accepted Answer

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act requires that financial institutions provide privacy protections to consumers, that customers be given notice before the sharing of personal information with other entities occurs, and that customers be given the right to opt out of disclosures to third parties.

Question 20

What must a plaintiff show to successfully sue for malicious prosecution?

Accepted Answer

To successfully sue for malicious prosecution, a plaintiff must show that a prior proceeding was instituted against him or her maliciously and without probable cause or factual basis, and that the earlier case was resolved in the plaintiff's favor. This means that the plaintiff must prove that the previous case was brought against them with an intent to harm them, knowing that there was no legitimate reason for the case to be brought, and that they were able to prove their innocence or have the case dismissed. Negligence or being a public official/figure is not necessarily relevant to a claim of malicious prosecution.

Quiz 9: Torts and Privacy protection