[Chewer] Naomie lives in a state that has a statute prohibiting dogs from running at large.The statutes purpose is to protect neighbors of dog owners from potential injury or property damage All dogs are required to be on a leash whenever they are off the owner's premises.Naomie's dog,while not on a leash,gets out of her backyard and goes next door to Pavel's house.Pavel left his gym bag on his back porch,and the dog chews up the bag and all its contents,including Pavel's gym shoes.Another neighbor sees the whole thing happen and informs Pavel.Pavel knows that this isn't the first time the dog has gotten loose and destroyed property,and Naomie has done nothing to warn anyone or prevent the dog from getting loose.
-Which theory will Pavel likely rely on to seek recovery for his damaged property against Naomie?
A)Stare decisis
B)Negligence per se
C)Res ipsa loquitur
D)A fortiori
E)Actus reus

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)Negligence per se applies to cases in which the defendant has violated a statute enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs.
B)Negligence per se applies to cases in which the defendant has violated a statute enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs.
C)Negligence per se applies to cases in which the defendant has violated a statute enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs.
D)Negligence per se applies to cases in which the defendant has violated a statute enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs.
E)Negligence per se applies to cases in which the defendant has violated a statute enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs.

[Chewer] Naomie Lives in a State That Has a Statute