The Director of the Children's Zoo, Mr

The director of the children's zoo, Mr. Watson, was appalled to see an employee, Jake, throwing a pitchfork like a javelin in an area where there were both animals and children. Luckily, no one was hurt. He yelled to Jake to get busy and feed the birds so that the birds would come closer to the children. Jake opened a new sealed bag of feed and threw some to the birds. It happened that the manufacturer of the feed, ordered by Watson, had accidentally mixed some caustic substance with the feed, so that later in the day Jake's hand began to blister badly. Jake sued Watson for negligence because of the burns he suffered; Watson sued Jake for negligence because of the way Jake used the pitchfork. On these facts, which of the following is true?

A) Jake will be found liable for negligence because he was careless with the pitchfork; a reasonable person would not have done what he did.
B) The test the court will apply to determine whether or not Jake owed a duty of care is this: would a reasonable person foresee that his acts could affect the animals and children?
C) Watson owed Jake a duty of care and Watson will, therefore, be liable for negligence.
D) Children attending a zoo are voluntarily assuming any risk.
E) Jake could not sue the manufacturer because he did not buy the feed.