Question 1

Breakfast Foods Corporation markets waffle irons,one of which proves defective and injures Chelsea.Breakfast Foods's strict liability to Chelsea for the harm caused by the defective waffle iron is based in part on the fact that

Accepted Answer

Strict liability in product liability cases often hinges on the fact that the manufacturer profits from the sale of the product, which justifies holding them liable for defects.

Question 2

Joe sees Karo floundering in Lake Rough Waters.Joe is liable on the ground of negligence

Accepted Answer

Joe is not liable for negligence under these circumstances because there is generally no legal duty to rescue someone unless a special relationship exists or Joe caused the peril.

Question 3

Dirk is driving a sport utility vehicle in which Elin is a passenger when they are involved in a traffic accident,and Elin is injured.Liability may be imposed on Dirk for Elin's injury if Dirk's driving is

Accepted Answer

Liability can be imposed on Dirk if his driving was both the causation in fact and the proximate cause of Elin's injury. Causation in fact refers to the actual cause of the injury, while proximate cause refers to the legal cause. If Dirk's actions were the actual cause of Elin's injury and those actions were also foreseeable as the legal cause of the injury, then liability can be imposed. If Dirk's actions were not the actual cause or if they were not foreseeable as the legal cause, then liability may not be imposed.

Question 4

Marie,a driver for Northern States Transport Company,causes a five-car acci?dent on an interstate highway.Marie and Northern States are liable to

Accepted Answer

Marie and Northern States are liable only to those whose injuries could reasonably have been foreseen, as liability typically depends on the foreseeability of harm in negligence cases.

Question 5

Pier shops in a Rowdy Ranch & Farm Store store.Enticed by a display,Pier takes an item to examine it and,when she is done,places it on the floor.Tanner,a consumer enticed by the same display,does not see the item on the floor,trips over it,falls,and suffers an injury.With respect to the danger,Rowdy had

Accepted Answer

Rowdy Ranch & Farm Store had a duty to discover and remove the hazard. As a business owner, they have a responsibility to ensure that their store is free from hazards that could harm their customers. In this case, Pier's action of placing the item on the floor created a potential hazard that could have been discovered and removed by the store. Therefore, it is their duty to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of their customers.

Question 6

Super Tool Company makes tools for consumers and construction professionals.While using a Super tool to replace an electrical outlet,Tom neglects to shut off the power and is electrocuted.Against a suit filed by Tom's heirs,Super's best defense is

Accepted Answer

Contributory negligence would be the best defense in this case for Super Tool Company since Tom was responsible for his own injury by neglecting to shut off the power before using the tool. Assumption of risk may not apply since Tom may not have necessarily known the risks involved with using the tool without shutting off the power. Negligence per se may also not apply since it refers to negligence that violates a specific law or regulation, which may not be applicable in this case. Superseding cause may also not apply since Tom's own actions were the immediate cause of his injury.

Question 7

Kelly is injured when she slips and falls on Lee's sidewalk.To determine whether Lee owed a duty of care to Kelly,Lee is subject to the standard of

Accepted Answer

Lee is subject to the standard of a reasonable person, which is used to determine whether a duty of care was owed in negligence cases. A reasonable person is a hypothetical person who behaves in a prudent and cautious manner in similar circumstances, and who takes reasonable care to avoid causing harm to others.

Question 8

Nico is a passenger in a car driven by Owen,whose negligence causes an accident,injuring himself.Nico,uninjured,accompanies Owen to Parkside Hospital in an ambulance.The ambulance is hit by a car driven by Quin,injuring Nico.Nico files a suit against Owen,whose best defense is

Accepted Answer

Superseding cause means an event that occurs after the defendant's initial act of negligence and which breaks the chain of causation, relieving the defendant of liability. In this case, the accident caused by Quin is an intervening event that breaks the chain of causation between Owen's negligence and Nico's injury. Therefore, Owen can argue that Quin's act was a superseding cause that relieved him of liability for Nico's injury.

Question 9

Molly shoots Norm with Opal's pistol.The proximate cause of Norm be?ing shot is most likely attributable to

Accepted Answer

Molly is the one who pulled the trigger and shot Norm with Opal's pistol, making her the proximate cause of the shooting. Opal's ownership or possession of the gun may have contributed to the circumstance, but it is not the direct cause of the shooting. Therefore, only Molly can be held accountable for the shooting.

Question 10

Lana hires Mike,an architect,to design a warehouse.Lana is dissatis?fied with the look of the new building and sues Mike,alleging negligence.Mike can successfully defend against the suit by proving that

Accepted Answer

The question is about negligence, which involves a duty of care and a breach of that duty. In this case, Mike's duty was to provide a reasonable design for the warehouse, and if he fulfilled that duty, he cannot be held negligent even if the design is not attractive. The fact that Lana is dissatisfied with the look of the new building does not necessarily mean that Mike breached his duty of care, since his responsibility was not to please the client aesthetically but to comply with building codes, safety regulations, and functional requirements. The question does not mention any injury suffered by Lana, so the only possible defense for Mike is that he did not violate his duty of care. Therefore, choice D is the best answer. The other choices are irrelevant or incorrect, since they do not address the issue of negligence.

Question 11

Jean is playing a computer game on a bad disk that melts in her drive,starting a fire that injures her hands.Jean files a suit against K-Tech,Inc. ,the game's manufacturer.K-Tech is held liable under the doctrine of strict liability.A significant appli?cation of this doctrine is in the area of

Accepted Answer

The doctrine of strict liability is a principle that holds a manufacturer or seller responsible for any harm caused by a defective product, regardless of whether they were negligent or not. Therefore, this doctrine applies to product liability cases such as the one in the scenario where Jean is injured by a defective computer game.

Question 12

Taylor slips and falls in Urban Mall and is injured.She files a suit against the mall for $500,000.Under a "pure" comparative negligence rule,Taylor could recover damages

Accepted Answer

Under a "pure" comparative negligence rule, Taylor is able to recover damages regardless of the percentage of fault attributed to her. The damages awarded will be reduced in proportion to her level of fault.

Question 13

Leo slips and falls in Mornin' Breakfast Café and is injured.Leo files a suit against Mornin' for $50,000.If Leo is 20 percent at fault and Mornin' is 80 percent,under a contributory negligence doctrine,Leo would recover

Accepted Answer

Under the contributory negligence doctrine, if the plaintiff (Leo) is found to be even partially at fault (20% in this case), he would recover nothing.

Question 14

A Rhode Island state statute imposes fines on tire repair businesses whose pneumatic equipment does not include automatic shut-off switches to protect employees.Bob's Brakes & Tires,Inc. ,does not have the switches on its equipment.Carter,a Bob's employee,suffers an injury that a shut-off switch would have prevented.Carter's best theory for recovery is

Accepted Answer

Negligence per se is a legal doctrine that states that an act is considered negligent if a statute or regulation was violated and the violation caused the injury. In this case, Bob's Brakes & Tires violated the Rhode Island state statute that requires automatic shut-off switches on pneumatic equipment, and the lack of such switches caused Carter's injury. Therefore, negligence per se is the best theory for Carter's recovery.

Question 15

Frank slips and falls on Gail's Harbor Tour Boat and is injured.Frank files a suit against Gail's for $500,000.If Frank is 20 percent at fault and Gail's is 80 percent,under the "50 percent rule" comparative neg?ligence principles,Frank would recover

Accepted Answer

Under the 50 percent rule comparative negligence principle, Frank can only recover if he is 50 percent or less at fault. Since he is only 20 percent at fault, he can still recover damages. However, his recovery will be reduced by his percentage of fault. Therefore, Frank would recover 80 percent of the damages, which is $400,000. Therefore, choice C is the best answer.

Question 16

Resources Recovery,Inc. ,uses dynamite in its remote mining operations.Sabrina stores household cleaners in his suburban garage.Most likely liable under the doctrine of strict liability for any injury caused by an abnormally dangerous activ?ity is
a.neither Resources Recovery nor Sabrina.
b.Resources Recovery and Sabrina.
c.Resources Recovery only.
d.Sabrina only.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Resources Recovery,Inc. ,uses dynamite in its remote...

Question 17

Lyn is injured when she is struck by debris floating on her property flooded by a breach of Mining Company's reservoir.The rule that a person who engages in certain activities may be liable under the doctrine of strict liability for any harm that results was established in

Accepted Answer

The rule mentioned in the question is known as the Rylands v. Fletcher rule. This case established that a person who brings onto their land something that is likely to do mischief if it escapes is strictly liable for any harm it causes. Therefore, choice C, Rylands v. Fletcher, is the best answer. Choice A is incorrect because it only provides the names of the parties involved in the hypothetical situation, and choice B is about the foreseeability of harm, which is not applicable to strict liability. Choice D is incorrect because Congress does not establish common law rules, such as strict liability, which are created by courts.

Question 18

Drake pushes Evon into the path of an oncoming car driven by Flip.Gina tries to rescue Evon,but the car hits both of them.Drake is liable for the injuries of

Accepted Answer

Drake acted intentionally to push Evon into the path of an oncoming car, which resulted in both Evon and Gina being injured. As a result, Drake is liable for the injuries of both Evon and Gina.

Question 19

George has a badly infected right foot.Herb,George's physician,prescribes amputation.George agrees.During the operation,Herb amputates the left foot.In George's suit against Herb,George's best theory for recovery is

Accepted Answer

Res ipsa loquitur applies when the nature of the accident is such that it implies negligence, and the instrumentality causing the injury was under the control of the defendant. In this case, amputating the wrong foot is an obvious error that suggests negligence.

Question 20

Pam files a successful suit against Quality Market based on Quality's neg?ligence.Normally,an award in such a suit consists of

Accepted Answer

Compensatory damages are the most common type of award in a negligence suit. They are intended to compensate the victim for the actual losses or damages they suffered as a result of the defendant's negligence, such as medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Comparative damages and contributory damages are not typically awarded in negligence suits, and punitive damages are only awarded in cases where the defendant's conduct was particularly egregious.

Quiz 7: A: Negligence and Strict Liability