In the Palsgraf case,foreseeability was an issue.The question addressed by the court was:
A) Was it foreseeable to the plaintiff (Ms. Palsgraf) that the scales would fall?
B) Was it foreseeable to the plaintiff (Ms. Palsgraf) that someone in the train station would be carrying explosive fireworks?
C) Was it foreseeable to the passenger carrying the fireworks that they might explode and injure someone?
D) Was it foreseeable to the railroad employee helping the passenger onto the train that doing so might lead to injury to Ms. Palsgraf or another bystander?
E) Was it foreseeable to Ms. Palsgraf that her injury would have been caused by an explosion?
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q45: Which of the following is true about
Q46: Sam had just finished a great day
Q47: A driver stopped at a convenience store
Q48: A plaintiff wants to sue on a
Q51: Sandy lives on the top floor of
Q52: A reporter appears on television and reports
Q53: Which of the following is true about
Q54: Burger Prince is one of the largest
Q55: If a plaintiff voluntarily enters into or
Q142: The proximate cause requirement for a negligence
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents