Question 1

Negligence claims are based upon which of the following legal grounds?&#10;A) Constitutional violations&#10;B) State tort law&#10;C) Section 1983 authorization&#10;D) State criminal codes

Accepted Answer

Negligence claims are based on state tort law, which typically involves a duty of care owed by one party to another, a breach of that duty, and resulting damages or injuries. Constitutional violations (A) and Section 1983 authorization (C) refer to civil rights violations, while state criminal codes (D) involve criminal prosecutions rather than civil lawsuits.

Question 2

A duty of care will arise from which of the following sources?&#10;A) Laws and judicial decisions&#10;B) Customs&#10;C) Agency regulations&#10;D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

A duty of care can arise from laws and judicial decisions, customs, and agency regulations. It is important for individuals and organizations to understand their legal and ethical obligations to exercise reasonable care towards others and avoid actions or omissions that could reasonably be expected to cause harm.

Question 3

A special duty of care by an officer may arise by virtue of:&#10;A) Situational relationships&#10;B) Special training provided to an officer&#10;C) Knowledge of the officer as to the condition of the person&#10;D) None of the above

Accepted Answer

C

Question 4

Possible remedies in civil actions include:&#10;A) Compensatory damages&#10;B) Punitive damages&#10;C) Nominal damages&#10;D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

All of these remedies may be available in civil actions, depending on the circumstances of the case. Compensatory damages are awarded to compensate the plaintiff for their losses. Punitive damages are awarded to punish the defendant for their wrongful act (when it is particularly egregious or intentional). Nominal damages are awarded when the plaintiff suffered no actual damages, but the court wants to recognize that the plaintiff's rights were violated.

Question 5

In order to prevail under the defense of assumption of the risk, a defendant must prove:&#10;A) The plaintiff is partially at fault in the matter&#10;B) There is at least some degree of fault on both parties&#10;C) The plaintiff had actual knowledge of the risk, or should have been aware of the risk&#10;D) The conduct of the plaintiff created the risk of harm

Accepted Answer

In order to prevail under the defense of assumption of the risk, a defendant must prove that the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the risk, or should have been aware of the risk. This means that the plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk and, therefore, the defendant cannot be held liable. The other choices, such as partial fault or conduct of the plaintiff creating the risk, are not elements of assumption of the risk.

Question 6

Lawsuits filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act must be based upon:&#10;A) Civil rights violation based upon the U.S. Constitution&#10;B) Civil rights violation based upon the state constitution&#10;C) Tort law&#10;D) All of the above

Accepted Answer

Lawsuits filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act must be based upon tort law, which involves a civil wrong or injury caused by another person or entity. The other options, civil rights violations based upon the U.S. Constitution or state constitution, may be addressed in separate legal actions but are not the basis for a lawsuit under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Question 7

A successful tort action requires that there be some actual injury to the plaintiff. Emotional distress is not a sufficient injury for a plaintiff to prevail.

Accepted Answer

Emotional distress can be a sufficient injury for a plaintiff to prevail in certain types of tort cases, such as intentional infliction of emotional distress or negligent infliction of emotional distress. However, in general, a successful tort action does require some actual physical, emotional, or financial injury to the plaintiff.

Question 8

Many jurisdictions have held that a plaintiff must prove more than mere negligence on the part of an officer who causes injury to another during a vehicular pursuit

Accepted Answer

Many jurisdictions require a higher level of proof, such as recklessness or deliberate indifference, when a plaintiff seeks to hold an officer liable for injury caused during a vehicular pursuit. Mere negligence is often not enough to establish liability.

Question 9

Unexpected deaths resulting from use of restraints and other force has developed as an area of potential liability for law enforcement officials.

Accepted Answer

This statement is true. Law enforcement officials can be held liable for deaths resulting from the use of restraints and other force if it is found that they used excessive force or violated an individual's civil rights.

Question 10

Police have a general civil duty to protect persons in high crime areas.

Accepted Answer

While police have a duty to serve and protect, they do not have a specific duty to protect individuals in any particular location or situation. The Supreme Court has ruled that the police have a duty to protect the general public as a whole, but not any specific individual.

Question 11

In a pure comparative negligence state, if the plaintiff and defendant are found to be equally at fault, the plaintiff will receive nothing for the damages sustained.

Accepted Answer

The answer of In a pure comparative negligence state, if...

Deck 3: Civil Liability Under State and Federal Tort Law