Question 1

The person who suffers a tort is called a tortfeasor.

Accepted Answer

The person who suffers a tort is called a plaintiff or victim. A tortfeasor is someone who commits a tort.

Question 2

Liability waivers are generally against public policy in tort cases and are not allowed as a defense.

Accepted Answer

Liability waivers are generally enforceable in tort cases and can serve as a defense if they are clear and unambiguous, and if the person signing the waiver had a reasonable opportunity to understand the risks involved. However, there may be certain situations where a liability waiver is against public policy and therefore unenforceable.

Question 3

Damages in a negligence suit are found to be $100,000.If the jury finds the defendant was 60 percent responsible,the defendant would pay for 60 percent of the damages ($60,000)under the rule of comparative negligence.

Accepted Answer

This is correct under the rule of comparative negligence. The defendant is responsible for paying their percentage of the damages based on their degree of fault found by the jury.

Question 4

In McCune v.Myrtle Beach Indoor Shooting Range,where McCune lost an eye playing paintball when he mask came off,the court held that the liability waiver signed by McCune violated public policy,so her suit could proceed.

Accepted Answer

The court held that the liability waiver signed by McCune was enforceable, and her suit could not proceed.

Question 5

Damages in a negligence suit are found to be $100,000.If the jury finds the plaintiff was 40 percent responsible,the defendant would pay for 60 percent of the damages ($60,000)under the rule of comparative negligence.

Accepted Answer

This is correct according to the rule of comparative negligence, where the defendant pays for a percentage of the damages proportional to their degree of fault in the case. In this scenario, the defendant would be responsible for 60% of the damages, which would amount to $60,000.

Question 6

In McCune v.Myrtle Beach Indoor Shooting Range,where McCune lost an eye playing paintball when he mask came off,the court held that McCune lost her right to sue because she assumed the risks of playing and signed a liability waiver.

Accepted Answer

The statement accurately reflects the holding of the court in McCune v. Myrtle Beach Indoor Shooting Range.

Question 7

Because danger invites rescue,those people who attempt to rescue others and get hurt in the process must bear the costs of their harms themselves.

Accepted Answer

This statement is a common myth known as the "rescue myth" and is not true. The law recognizes that rescuers who act in good faith and follow proper procedures should not bear the costs of their harms themselves. In fact, many countries have laws that provide protections and benefits to rescuers, such as workers' compensation and disability benefits.

Question 8

If a plaintiff is found to be comparatively negligent in a tort suit,the plaintiff will recover no money from the defendant.

Accepted Answer

In most states, a plaintiff can still recover damages in a tort suit even if they are found to be comparatively negligent. However, the amount of damages they can recover may be reduced in proportion to their degree of fault.

Question 9

In McCune v.Myrtle Beach Indoor Shooting Range,where McCune lost an eye playing paintball when he mask came off,the court held that the state legislature had exempted such amusement parks from tort liability.

Accepted Answer

The court did not hold that the state legislature had exempted amusement parks from tort liability in this case.

Question 10

In some states,if a plaintiff is found to have contributed fifty percent or more of the negligence to a situation,then there may be no recovery from the defendant.

Accepted Answer

This is known as the "50% rule" or "modified comparative negligence" and is followed by states like Colorado, Georgia, and Wyoming. If the plaintiff is found to be 50% or more at fault, they cannot recover damages from the defendant. However, in other states that follow "pure comparative negligence," the plaintiff can still recover damages even if they are 99% at fault.

Question 11

As a general rule,any defense to an intentional tort is also available in a negligence action.

Accepted Answer

This is because many of the defenses to intentional torts, such as consent and self-defense, also apply to negligence cases. However, there may be some defenses that only apply to one or the other, depending on the specific circumstances of the case.

Question 12

A young woman let a strange man into her motel room and was assaulted by him.She sued the motel.Because she was found 97% responsible,the motel did not have to pay her anything.

Accepted Answer

The young woman's actions may have contributed to the incident, but it would ultimately depend on the specific circumstances of the case and the laws in the jurisdiction. The percentage of fault attributed to each party would be determined by the court or a jury. The motel could still be found partially or fully responsible for the assault if they failed to provide adequate security measures or other forms of negligence.

Question 13

Intentional torts concern willful interference of a protected personal or property right.

Accepted Answer

Intentional torts require the defendant to have acted with intent, knowledge, or awareness of their actions and the harm they may cause to another's protected personal or property right. Examples include assault, battery, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Question 14

Intervening conduct is similar to superseding cause in negligence cases.

Accepted Answer

Intervening conduct and superseding cause are both concepts used in negligence cases to determine causation. Intervening conduct refers to actions or events that occur after the defendant's negligence but before the harm is caused, while superseding cause refers to a later event that breaks the chain of causation and relieves the defendant of liability. Both concepts involve an analysis of whether the original defendant's negligence was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's harm.

Question 15

The only defense in case of negligence is that of assumption of risk.

Accepted Answer

The defense of assumption of risk may be available in some cases of negligence, but it is not the only defense available. Other possible defenses may include contributory negligence, comparative negligence, or intervening causes.

Question 16

A man was injured when riding a mechanical bull at a state fair.The ride was working properly,but riders usually get bucked off.The man signed a waiver that he accepted the possibility of injury from a fall.When he sued for his injuries,you would expect the court to throw out the suit if the waiver clearly stated the dangers.

Accepted Answer

Since the man signed a waiver that clearly stated the possibility of injury from falling off the mechanical bull, the court is likely to uphold the waiver and dismiss the lawsuit.

Question 17

If the causal relationship between the defendant's act and the resulting harm is broken by an intervening act,there is an approximate cause.

Accepted Answer

The presence of an intervening act can break the chain of causation, meaning the defendant's act is no longer considered the proximate cause of the resulting harm.

Question 18

You see a house on fire and rush in to save a person trapped in the house.You suffer burns from the fire.The person who negligently started the fire has no legal obligation to you because there was no knowledge you would become involved.

Accepted Answer

This statement is false. The person who negligently started the fire can be held liable for any injuries or damages caused by their actions, even if they did not know that someone would attempt to rescue a person trapped in the house. This is because they had a legal duty to prevent harm from their actions, and their negligence directly led to the harm suffered by the person who attempted to rescue the trapped individual.

Question 19

The substantial factor test and the proximate cause rule produce significantly different results in negligence cases.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The substantial factor test and the proximate...

Question 20

Liability waivers are also called exculpatory clauses.

Accepted Answer

Liability waivers are also called exculpatory clauses, therefore the statement is true.

Quiz 6: Elements of Torts