Chpt 6 blaw 371

b. the deprivation of a person's liberty without justification

False imprisonment is: a. the deprivation of a person's liberty under special circumstances b. the deprivation of a person's liberty without justification c. the deprivation of a person's liberty in his own home d. the deprivation of a person's liberty in a public place e. the deprivation of a person's mental liberty

a. violates the protected interest in freedom from restraint of movement

False imprisonment: a. violates the protected interest in freedom from restraint of movement b. violates the protected interest of freedom to live where you chose c. violates the protected interest of freedom of speech d. is a violation of personal privileges e. none of the other choices

b. foreseeable

For a person's negligent conduct to be legally linked to its consequences, the chain of events connecting the two must be: a. unbroken b. foreseeable c. explainable d. undisputable e. none of the other choice

d. proximate cause or substantial factor

For liability to be imposed when negligence is alleged, in many jurisdictions, the injured party must prove that the defendant's act was not only the cause in fact of the injury but also the ___of the injury .a. superseding cause b. intervening conduct or strict liability c. misappropriation d. proximate cause or substantial factor e. none of the other choices are required

a. might be liable for assault

Fred approaches his co-worker Gloria in the office supply room and closes the door. Fred describes, in detail, the porno movie he watched last night. Fred has Gloria "trapped" in the room, causing her to fear that he might try something. Fred says that since they are alone he could show Gloria what the movie was about. Fred: a. might be liable for assault b. might be liable for battery c. might be liable for invasion of privacy d. might be liable for nuisance e. has committed no tort, he just has bad judgment

e. invasion of privacy

Harassing telephone calls may be the basis for a tort case of: a. false imprisonment b. battery c. negligence d. harmful contact e. invasion of privacy

b. the injured party gave permission to the alleged wrongdoer to interfere with a personal right

In an assault or battery tort case, consent is when: a. the injured party intentionally placed himself in danger b. the injured party gave permission to the alleged wrongdoer to interfere with a personal right c. the injured party did not give permission to the alleged wrongdoer to interfere with a personal right d. the alleged wrongdoer warned the injured party of the possibility of harm e. none of the other choices

a. can be either expressed or implied by words or conduct

In an assault or battery tort case, consent: a. can be either expressed or implied by words or conduct b. must be expressed with words c. must be expressed in writing d. must be expressed by all involved parties e. none of the other choices

b. legally distinct from

In an intentional tort action, motive is ____ the act. a. legally indistinct from b. legally distinct from c. indistinguishable from d. a key component of e. none of the other choices

d. win for observing a terrible injury inflicted on one's child

In case of a tort claim of emotional distress, the plaintiff could: a. win for having been insulted by bad language b. win only if some physical injury is proven to accompany the mental injury c. win only if "outward manifestations" of mental injury are apparent d. win for observing a terrible injury inflicted on one's child e. none of the other choices

a. the victim is the plaintiff

In contrast to a criminal case, in a tort case: a. the victim is the plaintiff b. the victim is a witness c. the victim does not receive compensation for injuries, but the wrongdoer may have to pay restitution d. the case is brought to court by the government e. the case is based on the alleged wrongdoer violating a rule imposed by the legislature

c. "stand your ground"

In most states ____ doctrines allow one to match force for force. a. "proximate cause" b. "intervening action" c. "stand your ground" d. "no retreat" e. "every man for himself"

c. Jemal not responsible due to Kevin's assumption of risk

Jemal is playing basketball at a school's outdoor court. Kevin asks if he can join the game. Jemal agrees. After playing for 15 minutes, Kevin is knocked to the ground. His wrist breaks when he hits the concrete. If Kevin sues Jemal for his injury, a court will probably find: a. Jemal guilty of carelessness b. Jemal committed a negligence tort c. Jemal not responsible due to Kevin's assumption of risk d. Jemal strictly liable for Kevin's harms e. Jemal's acts where the cause-in-harm of Kevin's injuries

d. all of the other specific choices

In a tort action: a. a party whose interests have been injured sues the party allegedly responsible b. a person or property has suffered injury as a consequence of the actions of another c. The injury to a person or property is legally the consequence of the actions of another d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

c. defamation by default

Jill publicly states that Alvin committed a murder. Jill's statement is considered: a. rude b. defamation per se c. defamation by default d. defamation qua non e. none of the other choices

a. a basic element linking one party's act and another's injury

In a tort of negligence, causation is: a. a basic element linking one party's act and another's injury b. an unimportant element that helps determine the final compensation amount c. the key to establishing whether the alleged wrongdoer acted in a reasonable manner d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other choices

b. damage to the good name of a company

In addition to damaging a reputation of a person, defamation can involve: a. damage to the profits of a company b. damage to the good name of a company c. damage to the good name of the defendant d. negligence on the part of the defendant e. none of the other choices

a. give immunity from liability

In an assault or battery case a privilege can: a. give immunity from liability b. reduce the amount the defendant has to pay to the plaintiff c. increase the amount the defendant has to pay to the plaintiff d. allow the defendant to defer payment of damages until a later date e. none of the other choices

d. all of the specific answer choices

A criminal case differs from a tort case because: a. in a criminal case the victim does not receive compensation b. in a criminal case the victim is a witness c. a criminal case is brought against the alleged wrongdoer by the government d. all of the specific answer choices e. none of the other specific choices

b. publication of information about a person taken from public records

Which of the following would be least likely to be an invasion of privacy: a. the use of a person's photograph without permission b. publication of information about a person taken from public records c. publication of information about a person that comes from private sources d. publication of information about a person that places them in a false light to others e. none of the other choices

b. pleading with a movie star for an autograph

Which of the following would be least likely to be an invasion of privacy: a. the use of a person's photograph without permission b. pleading with a movie star for an autograph c. publication of information about a person that comes from private sources d. publication of information about a person that places them in a false light to others e. walking into the home of a famous sports personality without permission

A. foreseeable

While Mrs. O'Leary may have been negligent in leaving an oil lamp in the barn for her cow to kick over, she would not be held liable for the Great Chicago Fire of 1871 because the chain of events from the cow kicking the lantern to the destruction of the city was not: A. foreseeable B. indsiputeable C. unavoidable D. all of the specific choices E. none of the specific choices

d. no tort; you gave your consent to risk injury

While playing volleyball you are set to return a shot when another player stupidly runs up behind you and also tries to get the ball. This player (on your team) knocks you down; you break your arm. There is: a. a tort of assault b. a tort of battery c. a tort of assault and battery d. no tort; you gave your consent to risk injury e. none of the other choices

b. battery

While you are sound asleep, your roommate hits you in the head with a brick. This is most likely to be the tort of: a. assault b. battery c. negligence d. malicious prosecution e. privilege

a. the information was in a public record

William, a sports reporter, finds out some embarrassing facts about a star soccer player hidden in a public record and publishes them. William is probably safe from an invasion of privacy suit because: a. the information was in a public record b. the soccer player will be too embarrassed to press charges c. William is a reporter d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

c. events classified as torts in the United States occur, but personal injury suits for damages are not allowed

With regard to torts, New Zealand differs from the United States in that: a. events classified as torts in the United States do not occur in New Zealand b. tort cases result in much higher payments to New Zealand victims than to US victims c. events classified as torts in the United States occur, but personal injury suits for damages are not allowed d. New Zealanders do not bring tort cases because of their history as a British colony e. none of the other choices

a. personal injury tort suits are not allowed

With regard to torts, New Zealand differs from the United States in that: a. personal injury tort suits are not allowed b. personal injury tort suits must be filed within three days of the alleged harm occurring c. personal injury tort suits have a maximum damage award d. New Zealand tort law does not differ in any significant way e. none of the other choices

d. all of the other specific choices

With regard to torts, New Zealand differs from the United States in that: a. personal injury tort suits are not allowed b. there are no mega-damage awards c. injured parties are compensated from a social insurance fund d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

e. all the other choices

With the gradual adoption of some portions of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, courts will: a. rely less on the notion of proximate cause b. move away from the notion of the "substantial factor" c. use a "risk standard" to help judge when liability should be imposed d. presume duty almost always exists where there is a risk of physical harm e. all the other choices

e. no case against Liz

Joe files for bankruptcy in federal court. Liz, a reporter, finds out about this public document and prints a story in the newspaper about Joe's bad finances. Joe sues Liz for invasion of privacy. In this case, Joe has: a. a case of false light against Liz b. a case of appropriation against Liz c. a case of public exposure of private facts against Liz d. a case of intrusion of solitude against Liz e. no case against Liz

d. privilege and consent

The major defense(s) in assault and battery cases is (are): a. privilege b. cause-in-fact c. consent d. privilege and consent e. privilege, consent and cause-in-fact

c. truth

The most common defense to a claim of defamation is: a. consent b. proximate cause c. truth d self-defense e. protection of others

c. use a "risk standard" to help judge when liability should be imposed

With the gradual adoption of some portions of the Restatement (Third) of Torts, courts will: a. rely less on the notion of ultimate cause b. put a limit on damage awards c. use a "risk standard" to help judge when liability should be imposed d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

a. former employees suing their ex-boss for negative statements about them

Most defamation suits come from: a. former employees suing their ex-boss for negative statements about them b. former employees suing their ex-boss for criticizing their work c. music artists suing critics for negative statements about their albums d. students suing teachers for negative letters of recommendation e. politicians suing reporters for negative news articles

b. shooting someone who attempts to steal your new Lexus

The law permits certain defensive actions to be taken without incurring tort liability. Courts would be unlikely to allow which defensive actions? a. shooting a man who is raping a woman at knife-point b. shooting someone who attempts to steal your new Lexus c. holding someone down who has hit your friend d. grabbing and holding someone who attempts to steal your new Lexus e. c and d

E. all of the other choices

The law torts reflects: A. community standards B. social values C. the current business environment D. traditional standards E. all of the other choices

a. invasion of privacy

The use of a person's name or picture without permission is an example of the tort of: a. invasion of privacy b. negligence c. invasion of solitude d. invasion of space e. battery

d. the wrongdoer knew who would suffer the injury

There are several key elements needed to establish the legal requirements for there to be an intentional tort. Which is not an element: a. the wrongdoer knew what she was doing b. the wrongdoer knew that certain results could occur c. the wrongdoer knew possible consequences of his act d. the wrongdoer knew who would suffer the injury e. all of the other choices are necessary elements

e. all of the other choices are invasions of privacy

Which of the following would be an invasion of privacy: a. the publication of a person's photograph without permission b. illegally wiretapping a person's phone c. publishing a story about an individual based on false information d. publicly revealing a person's personal debt information e. all of the other choices are invasions of privacy

d. all of the specific other choices

A business can become involved in a tort action: a. if an individual is harmed or injured by the actions of the business or its employees b. if an individual is injured by a product produced by the business c. if a business harms another business d. all of the specific other choices e. none of the other specific choices

e. an employee commits a felony unrelated to his place of employment

A business can become involved in tort action in all of the following ways EXCEPT: a. a person I harmed by the actions of a business b. a person is harmed by the actions of a business's employees c. a person is harmed by a product manufactured or distributed by a business d. a business is harmed by the wrongful actions of another business or person e. an employee commits a felony unrelated to his place of employment

a. was published in good faith and with proper motives

A conditional privilege eliminates liability for defamation when the statement: a. was published in good faith and with proper motives b. was not true c. was true d. was published with the plaintiff's knowledge and consent e. was legally found in public record

b. defamation per se

A statement that is presumed by law to be harmful to the person to whom they were directed and therefore requires no proof of harm or injury is: a. slander b. defamation per se c. libel d. absolute privilege e. false light

b. breaks the causal connection between a person's act and the resulting harm to another

A superseding cause is an act that: a. happens just before the act that causes harm to the victim b. breaks the causal connection between a person's act and the resulting harm to another c. links a person's act to the resulting harm to another d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

b. acted to further an interest of social importance that deserves protection

A privilege can excuse what would have been a tort if the defendant: a. acted without knowing the consequences of his actions b. acted to further an interest of social importance that deserves protection c. acted to further his own interests d. acted to harm a wrongdoer e. none of the other choices

b. provide compensation for injured parties by wrongdoers

A major purpose of tort law is to: a. replace the insurance industry b. provide compensation for injured parties by wrongdoers c. impose criminal penalties on the negligent d. ensure Equal Protection of the 14th Amendment is operational e. ensure the effective operation of the Due Process Clause

e. the man assumed the dangers voluntarily so could not sue for the injuries he suffered

A man was injured while riding a mechanical bull owned by an independent contractor at a state fair. He paid to ride the bull and signed a form that he understood the risk of injury. After he was injured, he sued the fair that provided the ride for negligence. You would expect the court held that: a. the fair was not liable because it did not own the ride; but the owner of the ride could be found liable in strict liability because it knew of the dangers b. the fair was not liable because it did not own the ride; but the owner of the ride could be found liable in negligence because it knew of the dangers c. the fair and the owner of the ride could both be liable in negligence d. the fair was liable in negligence because it had the primary responsibility to its patrons not to provide dangerous amusements in a negligent manner e. the man assumed the dangers voluntarily so could not sue for the injuries he suffered

C. invasion of privacy

A medical worker was sued by a patient for discussing the patient's medical condition with a mutual friend. The patient most likely sued the medical worker for the tort of: A. false imprisonment B. mental distress C. invasion of privacy D. nothing because medical personnel are exempt from any liability in such instances E. none of the other choices

c. their conduct was not that of a reasonable person

A person has acted negligently if: a. they were incapable of reaching the victim before the harm occurred b. they tried to prevent the harm, but could not due to a lack of professional knowledge c. their conduct was not that of a reasonable person d. they admit to not liking the victim e. none of the other choices

C. a criminal act

A tort is NOT: A. a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract B. a breach of duty owned to another that causes harm C. a criminal act D. conduct that unreasonably interferes with the interests of another E. none of the other choices

A. a breach of a duty owed to another that causes harm

A tort is: A. a breach of a duty owed to another that causes harm B. a public law C. designed to criminally punish wrongdoers D. a wrong defined by Congress E. a legal wrong defined by state legislatures

D. a civil wrong not a breach of contract

A tort is: A. negligent injury that can result in fines or imprisonment for less than one year B. a criminal act C. a felony D. a civil wrong not a breach of contract E. none of the other choices

B. have a defense of self-defense

Assume that Karen walks up to you and slaps you in the face. You slap her back. She sues you for battery. In this case, you: A. have a defense of privilege B. have a defense of self-defense C. have a defense of consent D. have a defense of assault E. are guilty; pay up

d. affirmative

Assumption of risk is a(n) ______ defense. a. proactive b. positive c. conciliatory d. affirmative e. none of the other choices

c. insurance policy against being sued for negligence

Assumption of risk is a(n): a. fail safe way to protect oneself from negligence liability b. valid defense against a negligence action c. insurance policy against being sued for negligence d. all of the specific choices e. none of the specific choices

b. public policy favors complete freedom of speech

Absolute privilege grants immunity in situations where: a. the defendant did not intend to cause harm b. public policy favors complete freedom of speech c. businesses stand to lose money d. all of the specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

d. defenses to an action of defamation

Absolute, conditional and constitutional privileges are all: a. defenses to an action of false imprisonment b. defenses to an action of battery c. defenses to an action of invasion of privacy d. defenses to an action of defamation e. none of the other choices

a. specifically raised by the defendant

Assumption of risk is an affirmative defense, which means it must be: a. specifically raised by the defendant b. supported by at least two witnesses c. specifically raised by the plaintiff d. specifically raised before the case is brought to court e. none of the other choices

b. self-defense

Albert is attacked by Bruce while getting out of his car in a store parking lot. Albert punches Bruce in the face, breaking Bruce's nose. When Bruce sues Albert for battery, Albert is likely to use as a defense. a. defense of property b. self-defense c. consent d. privilege e. none of the other choices

a. comparative negligence

Alex sues Lisa for $60,000 for damages suffered as a result of her negligence because she failed to place a sign on the door of her restaurant warning customers to "Watch Your Step" as they exited the building. A jury awards Alex$40,000 because Alex's intoxication made him 33% responsible for his injuries. Lisa avoided full liability because she showed: a. comparative negligence b. intoxicating negligence c. intervening conduct d. assumption of risk e. evil intent

c. negligence

Alicia, talking on her cell phone, foolishly runs off the road and over Eduardo's foot. The tort that Eduardo will most likely initiate is: a. battery b. assault c. negligence d. emotional distress e. none, since Alicia's action was innocent

a. responsible for losses suffered by its client that could be linked to reliance on the work

An accounting firm was sued for negligently preparing a financial report for a company. It causes losses to occur. At trial, the firm was found to have been negligent in its work. This meant that the firm would likely be: a. responsible for losses suffered by its client that could be linked to reliance on the work b. responsible for losses suffered by its client that could be linked to reliance on that work and to the firm whose books were audited since that firm's reputation was damaged c. responsible for losses not to exceed $1 million, the statutory limit on accountant liability in that state d. not responsible for damages despite negligence, since reliance could not be shown e. not responsible for damages despite negligence because of a lack of proximate cause

c. the restraint was intentional

False imprisonment is the deprivation of a person's liberty without justification. To establish a cause of action, the plaintiff must show: a. the restraint was cruel or demeaning b. that she attempted to leave but was prevented c. the restraint was intentional d. that physical force was used e. all of the other choices must be shown

c. need not be physical

False imprisonment is the unjustified, intentional detention of a person. The detention: a. must be physical b. must be violent c. need not be physical d. must be verbal e. must be reasonable under the circumstances

a. assuming the risk of being hit by a stray baseball

Baseball fans who willingly sit where they might be hit by a stray baseball during the normal course of play are: a. assuming the risk of being hit by a stray baseball b. prime candidates for bringing a negligence tort action against any player who hits a ball into the stands c. unknowingly putting themselves in danger d. covered by the baseball players' "assumption of risk" insurance e. none of the other choices

c. invasion of privacy

Illegal wire tapping is an intrusion into a person's solitude and an example of the tort of: a.negligence b. invasion of solitude c. invasion of privacy d. battery e. false imprisonment

d. all of the other specific choices must be shown

False imprisonment is the deprivation of a person's liberty without justification. To establish a cause of action, the plaintiff must show: a. that their right to freedom of movement was violated b. the defendant restrained the plaintiff c. the restraint was intentional d. all of the other specific choices must be shown e. none of the other specific choices need be shown

B. the injured party have knowledge of the danger

The intentional tort of assault requires that: A. there be physical contact with the body B. the injured party have knowledge of the danger C. the injured part be detained against his or her will D. the defendant intended to injure the plaintiff E. all of the other choices

D. the international perspective on liability

The law of torts reflects all EXCEPT: A. social values B. community standards C. the way we deal with each other in the current environment D. the international perspective on liability E. none of the other choices

a. invasion of privacy

Carl's neighbor writes a column for the local paper. One week he reveals Carl's drug abuse problems and Carl is subsequently fired from work. Carl will probably sue his neighbor for: a. invasion of privacy b. assault c. battery d. false imprisonment e. negligence

a. evidence showing that a defendant's action or inaction is the actual cause of an injury that would not have occurred but for the defendant's behavior

Cause in fact is established by: a. evidence showing that a defendant's action or inaction is the actual cause of an injury that would not have occurred but for the defendant's behavior b. evidence showing the defendant intentionally harmed the victim c. evidence showing the victim was harmed due to circumstances outside his control d. evidence showing the victim could not prevent the injury e. evidence showing that the defendant could not have prevented the injury

b. it creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others

Conduct is likely to be held to be negligent if: a. it results in misappropriation b. it creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others c. it results in profits for a business at the expense of its employees d. it creates incentives for people to harm others' property e. none of the other choices

a. defenses in assault and battery cases

Consent, privilege, self-defense and defense of others and of property are all: a. defenses in assault and battery cases b. defenses in negligence tort cases c. not permissible defenses in assault and battery cases d. examples of proximate causes e. none of the other choices

d. battery

Contact that does not cause actual physical harm, but offends a reasonable person's sense of dignity could be a tort of: a. negligence b. fraud c. malicious prosecution d. battery e. assault

b. negligence

The tort that protects individuals from harm based on careless and unintentional conduct of others is called: a. conversion b. negligence c. strict liability d. absolute liability e. none of the other choices

c. their right to privacy is largely waived once they become a public figure

Entertainers, politicians and sports personalities differ from average individuals in that: a. they tend to receive bigger damage awards in invasion of privacy cases b. it is illegal to publish personal information about them without consent c. their right to privacy is largely waived once they become a public figure d. they must make all personal information public e. none of the other choices

a.defamation

Erin's employer published a story about her that portrayed her as a sneaky, deceitful person when in reality, she is a very open and honest person. Erin will probably sue for: a.defamation b. negligence c. assault d. false imprisonment e. battery

b. a valid defense

Even if an injured party establishes the required elements of negligence, the injured party may be denied compensation if the defendant establishes:a. a plausible cause b. a valid defense c. a proximate cause d.proximate defense e. a substantial defense

D. infliction of emotional distress

Dee, a debt collector, calls old Mr. Thompson ten times a day about his debts. She calls him names and threatens to have him beat up. this causes him severe anxiety attacks each time they speak. Dee may be best sued for: A. defamation B. battery C. fraud D. infliction of emotional distress E. nothing since Thompson owed the money

a. a statement is presumed by law to be harmful to the person to whom it was directed and therefore require no proof of harm or injury

Defamation per se is when: a. a statement is presumed by law to be harmful to the person to whom it was directed and therefore require no proof of harm or injury b. a statement is so outrageous that it cannot be denied that it harmed the person to whom it was directed c. a statement is presumed by law not to be harmful to the person to whom it was directed d. a statement is presumed by law to be only marginally harmful to the person to whom it was directed and therefore requires proof of harm or injury e. none of the other choices

A. assumption of the risk

Defense to a negligent act include: A. assumption of the risk B. existence of proximate cause C. existence of a substantial factor D. res ipsa loquitur E. all of the other choices

c. assumption of the risk and comparative negligence

Defenses to a negligent act include: a. assumption of the risk b. comparative negligence c. assumption of the risk and comparative negligence d. existence of proximate cause e. none of the other choices

a. assumption of the risk

Defenses to a negligent act include: a. assumption of the risk b. existence of proximate cause c. existence of a substantial factor d. res ipsa loquitur e. all of the other choices

a. comparative negligence

Defenses to a negligent act include: a. comparative negligence b. existence of proximate cause c. existence of a substantial factor d. res ipsa loquitur e. all of the other choices

C. also available to defendants in negligence torts

Defenses to intentional torts are: A. useless to defendants in negligence torts B. not available to defendants in negligence torts C. also available to defendants in negligence torts D. rarely available to defendants in negligence torts E. none of the other choices

d. lose because there is no proximate cause

Driving down the street you stupidly run a red light and hit a car legally going through a green light. You knock that car into a parked car, which knocks a loaded gun out of the parked car that falls on the street and fires a bullet that hits a person walking on the sidewalk. That person sues you in tort for damages. They will probably: a. win because you were negligent and caused their injury b. win because strict liability would apply to your actions c. win because carrying a loaded gun is dangerous d. lose because there is no proximate cause e. lose because traffic violations may not be the basis for tort actions

c. substantial factor test

Due to criticism that the proximate cause rule is difficult to understand and apply, some states have replaced it with the: a. fault factor test b. considerable factor test c. substantial factor test d. ultimate cause rule e. none of the other choices

d. all of the specific choices

Due to the requirement of proximate cause, in order for a person to be held liable for negligence it must be shown that: a. a reasonably prudent person would have foreseen the danger and done something to prevent it b. the defendant knew or should have known that the victim would be harmed c. the defendant acted with less than reasonable care, despite the foreseeability of harm to the victim d. all of the specific choices e. none of the specific choices

d. the parties agree beforehand that the plaintiff will relieve the defendant of his or her legal duty toward the plaintiff

Express assumption of risk is when: a. the parties agree beforehand that the defendant will relieve the plaintiff of his or her legal duty towards the defendant b. the parties agree beforehand that the plaintiff will do everything in his power to protect the defendant from known risks c. the parties agree beforehand that the defendant is only responsible for unknown risks d. the parties agree beforehand that the plaintiff will relieve the defendant of his or her legal duty toward the plaintiff e. none of the other choices

b. infliction of emotional distress

Extreme debt collection tactics, such as late night threatening phone calls, may cause legal action based on the tort of: a. battery b. infliction of emotional distress c. persecution d. malicious prosecution e. all of the other choices

d. the force was not reasonable under the circumstances

If John shoots Bill when he sees him stealing a packet of gum from John's convenient store, John will not be able to use defense of property as a defense because: a. guns are only allowed for defense of human life b. only policemen are allowed to use guns to defend property c. there were no witnesses d. the force was not reasonable under the circumstances e. the gum was worth less than $10,000

b. assault

If Sam points a gun at Harry, a stranger, and says "Prepare to die," but then does nothing, the tort possibly committed is: a. negligence b. assault c. battery d. slander e. none of the other choices

a. he could still be liable because motive is legally distinct from act and intent

If a defendant in an intentional tort action did not intend to cause harm: a. he could still be liable because motive is legally distinct from act and intent b. he could still be liable because he was careless c. he cannot be held liable because his motive was not to harm the plaintiff d. he cannot be held liable because he did not know who would be harmed by his actions e. none of the other choices

b. part of the injury is held to be the plaintiff's fault

If a jury finds there is comparative negligence in a tort case, which of the following happens: a. damages are not allowed to be awarded b. part of the injury is held to be the plaintiff's fault c. the defendant is relieved of any fault d. the judge issues a judgment notwithstanding the verdict e. none of the other choices

A. assault

If a person intends to act to cause a harmful or offensive contact, he is liable for the tort of: A. assault B. battery C. defamation D. duress E. false imprisonment

b. defend the victim by using reasonable force

If a person is being threatened with an attack, another person has the privilege to: a. defend the victim by shooting the attacker b. defend the victim by using reasonable force c. defend the victim by arresting the attacker d. all of the specific choices e. none of the specific choices

b. the negligent conduct will not result in liability

If alleged consequences are too far removed from the negligent conduct: a. there will be a limit imposed on the damage award b. the negligent conduct will not result in liability c. the negligent conduct will still result in liability d. the victim will be required to have at least two expert witnesses testify on his behalf e. none of the other choices

c. sue for libel and may win in English courts, but not in American courts

If an English newspaper prints a hurtful story about Prince William, that is reprinted in American papers, and it turns out that the newspaper had no malice toward the Prince, but knew the story was not factual, Prince William would most likely: a. not sue in English courts, but would have a good chance in American courts b. sue for libel in English and American courts and probably win in both c. sue for libel and may win in English courts, but not in American courts d. sue only for "distortion" in English courts; there is no case for American courts e. not sue based on his sovereign immunity

b. held subject to the standard of care imposed on professional parties

If an accounting firm is sued for negligently preparing a faulty financial report for a company that caused significant losses by those who relied on the accounting, the accounting firm is likely to be: a. not liable; there is no promise that results will be perfect b. held subject to the standard of care imposed on professional parties c. held subject to a special statutory standard of care d. held to have violated the principles of strict liability e. none of the other choices

c. superseding cause

If causal connection between a person's act and the resulting harm to another is broken by an intervening act or event, the act or event is called: a. proximate cause b. unforeseen cause c. superseding cause d. foreseeable cause e. none of the other choices

a. it is not a violation of the right to privacy

If embarrassing information is taken from a public file or record and published: a. it is not a violation of the right to privacy b. it is not an assault c. it is a violation of the right to privacy d. it is a violation of the right to privacy only if the person does not know the file exists e. it is a violation of the right to privacy only if the person publishing the information benefits monetarily

b. there was no evidence of actual malice by the employer

In Chambers v. Travelers Companies, where Chambers sued for defamation after she was fired for her behavior, which included failure to reveal certain information about a business trip, but the district court held for Travelers, and the appeals court agreed because: a. Chambers was new to the company and could be fired for any reason within the first 90 days of employment b. there was no evidence of actual malice by the employer c. the manager who fired Chambers did not know her d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

b. Chambers did not have a case because Travelers had a qualified privilege that it did not abuse

In Chambers v. Travelers Companies, where Chambers sued for defamation after she was fired for her behavior, which included failure to reveal certain information about a business trip, but the district court held for Travelers, the appeals court found that: a. Chambers did not have a case because the information was true b. Chambers did not have a case because Travelers had a qualified privilege that it did not abuse c. Chambers did not have a case because she had previously offended the CEO of Travelers by"insubordinate communication" d. all of the other specific choices are correct e. none of the other specific choices

c. the officers intended to cause an offensive contact and did cause an offensive contact

In Fuerschbach v. Southwest Airlines, where Fuerschbach was "arrested" by the police as a prank at work, the appeals court held that there could be a tort of assault and battery by the police because: a. the officers did not intend to cause an offensive contact, but ultimately did cause an offensive contact b. the officers intended to cause an offensive contact, but did not actually cause an offensive contact c. the officers intended to cause an offensive contact and did cause an offensive contact d. the officers did not intend to cause an offensive contact and did not cause an offensive contact e. none of the other choices

a. could be a tort of assault and battery by the police

In Fuerschbach v. Southwest Airlines, where Fuerschbach was "arrested" by the police as a prank at work, the appeals court held that there: a. could be a tort of assault and battery by the police b. could be a tort of assault and battery by the workers who arranged the "arrest" c. could be no tort because no malice was involved d. could be no tort because a reasonable person would not act like Fuerschbach did e. none of the other choices

c. expressly assumed the risk

In Geczi v. Lifetime Fitness, where Geczi suffered an injury when a treadmill at Lifetime malfunctioned but a jury held Lifetime not to be negligent, the appeals court held that Lifetime was not liable because Geczi _____: a. implicitly assumed the risk b. definitely assumed the risk c. expressly assumed the risk d. refused to assume the risk e. none of the other choices are correct

a. Geczi expressly assumed the risk of injury

In Geczi v. Lifetime Fitness, where Geczi suffered an injury when a treadmill at Lifetime malfunctioned but a jury held Lifetime not to be negligent, the appeals court held that Lifetime was not liable because: a. Geczi expressly assumed the risk of injury b. Geczi was over 18 when she signed the release of liability form c. Geczi was a rational adult who should have understood the inherent risks of a treadmill d. Geczi signed the release of liability form in front of witnesses e. all of the other choices are correct

d. was not liable because Geczi assumed the risk and signed a liability waiver

In Geczi v. Lifetime Fitness, where Geczi suffered an injury when a treadmill at Lifetime malfunctioned but a jury held Lifetime not to be negligent, the appeals court held that Lifetime: a. was liable for negligence for failure to warn Geczi of the risks b. was liable for negligence because the machine was not properly maintained c. was not liable because Geczi had been seen not exercising good judgment when using the machine d. was not liable because Geczi assumed the risk and signed a liability waiver e. none of the other choices

b. she had no claim for emotional distress because the situation was upsetting, not outrageous

In Lawler v. Montblanc North America, where Lawler, a store manager, was fired after telling her employer that she could not work more than 20 hours a week due to a medical condition, she sued for emotional distress and the appeals court held that: a. she had no claim for emotional distress, but may have one for assault because of the fear she felt b. she had no claim for emotional distress because the situation was upsetting, not outrageous c. she had a claim for emotional distress as her expert witness testified that the situation likely triggered a severe mental response d. she had a claim for emotional distress, as her expert witness testified that the behavior of her supervisor was outrageous and "beyond the bounds of decency" e. none of the other choices are correct

b. emotional distress

In Lawler v. Montblanc North America, where Lawler, a store manager, was fired after telling her employer that she could not work more than 20 hours a week due to a medical condition, she sued for: a. libel b. emotional distress c. assault d. battery e. slander

e. all of the other choices are part of the appeal's court reasoning

In Lawler v. Montblanc North America, where Lawler, a store manager, was fired after telling her employer that she could not work more than 20 hours a week due to a medical condition. She sued for emotional distress but lost at trial. For the appeals court to reverse the district court's judgment for the defendant it held that Lawler would have had to show that: a. the defendant committed an act amounting to extreme or outrageous conduct b. the defendant had the intent to cause extreme emotional distress c. the defendant's conduct was the actual cause or proximate cause of plaintiff's injury d. Lawler must show more than "anxiety" and "sleeplessness" e. all of the other choices are part of the appeal's court reasoning

D. there was nothing in the situation to suggest to a cautious mind hat the package would cause damage

In Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Company, involving a woman injured by an accidentally dropped package of fireworks that exploded as it was run over by a train, Palsgraf's injuries were not a result of negligence on the part of the railroad because: A. the railroad has strict regulations against carrying fireworks on trains B. the victim knew the package contained fireworks, but the railroad employees did not C. the victim knew the man carrying the package of fireworks D. there was nothing in the situation to suggest to a cautious mind hat the package would cause damage E. there were the required number of railroad employees present

E. was not liable because of a lack of proximate cause

In Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad, where Palsgraf was hit by machinery that fell when an explosion occurred at a train station, and she sued the railroad for negligence, the New York high court held that the railroad: A. was negligent for exposing Palsgraf to danger, so could be liable for her injury B. was negligent for exposing Palsgraf to danger, but the cause of the accident was a careless passenger, not the railroad, so it was relieved of liability by intervening conduct C. was negligent for exposing Palsgraf to danger, but the explosion was not the proximate cause of the accident, so there was no liability D. was negligent for exposing Palsgraf to danger, but its actions were not a substantial factor in what caused the accident, so there was no liability E. was not liable because of a lack of proximate cause

C. there was nothing about the package that would suggest it was dangerous if it dropped

In Palsgraf v. Long Island Road company, involving a woman injured by an accidentally dropped package of fireworks that exploded as it was run over by a train, the railroad should not have been held liable for negligence because: A. Palsgraf should not have been standing so close to the tracks B. railroad employees repeatedly warned Palsgraf that she was standing in a dangerous location C. there was nothing about the package that would suggest it was dangerous if it dropped D. the railroad employees acted in an unreasonable manner E. none of the other choices

D. all of the specific choices

In Squish La Fish v. Thomaco Speciality Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product packaging, Squish La Fish sued the adhesive seller for negligent misrepresentation because: A. Squish La Fish was the foreseeable user of Thomco's representations concerning the adhesive B. Squish La Fish felt that Thomco gave false information about the adhesive's removability C. Squish La Fish felt that it relied on Thomco''s false information about the adhesive D. all of the specific choices E. none of the specific choices

D. negligent misrepresentation

In Squish La Fish v. Thomaco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product packaging, the company that brought the adhesive sued the seller for a tort called: A. defamation B. fraud C. intentional misrepresentation D. negligent misrepresentation E. none of the other choices

B. Squish La Fish felt that Thomco gave false information about the adhesive's removability

In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Speciality Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product packaging, Squish La Fish sued the adhesive seller for negligent misrepresentation because: A. Squish La Fish could not use the adhesive because it was the wrong color B. Squish La Fish felt that Thomco gave false information about the adhesive's removability C. Thomco raised the price of the adhesive after Squish La Fish agreed to buy it D. all of the specific choices E. none of the specific choices

C. Squish La Fish felt that it relied on Thomco's false information about the adhesive and suffered economic losses as a result

In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Speciality Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product packaging, Squish La Fish sued the adhesive seller for negligent misrepresentation because: A. Squish La Fish could not use the adhesive because it was toxic B. Thomco raised the price of the adhesive after Squish La Fish agreed to buy it C. Squish La Fish felt that it relied on Thomco's false information about the adhesive and suffered economic losses as a result D. all of the specific choices E. none of the specific choices

d. could proceed because the defendant may have negligently provided false information

In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as claimed, the appeals court held that the claim of negligent misrepresentation: a. failed because the defendant only recommended a product made by another company b. failed because the defendant obtained no financial gain by the bad decision c. failed because the plaintiff is a sophisticated business and could evaluate the product d. could proceed because the defendant may have negligently provided false information e. could proceed because the defendant intended to extract a large payment from the plaintiff based on false information

d. she would recover the three percent under the comparative negligence rule

In Wassell v. Adams the plaintiff was 97% responsible for the attack she suffered in a hotel room when she opened her door for a stranger. As a result, the jury awarded her 3% of an $850,000 verdict, or $25,500. The appeals court agreed, holding that: a. she would recover nothing because was primarily responsible for what happened b. she would recover nothing because the criminal, who was not caught, was the responsible party, not the hotel owner c. she would recover the entire verdict because the defendant was found partly responsible d. she would recover the three percent under the comparative negligence rule e. none of the other choices

c. comparative negligence

In Wassell v. Adams the plaintiff was 97% responsible for the attack she suffered in a hotel room. As a result, the jury awarded her 3% of an $850,000 verdict, or $25,500. This action reflects which of the following legal doctrines? a. contributory negligence b. assumption of risk c. comparative negligence d. intervening conduct e. none of the other choices

a. a reasonably skilled, competent and experienced doctor

In a case in which a doctor is sued for negligence due to an accidentally botched surgery, the reasonable person standard would be that of: a. a reasonably skilled, competent and experienced doctor b. a recent graduate from medical school c. a high school biology teacher d. an average American e. none of the other choices

c. that a jury could reasonably have found a false imprisonment in this circumstance

In one case a woman shopping at K-Mart was accused by a security guard, after she walked out of the store, of having put merchandise in her purse. She denied it and opened her purse so he could look in it. He still insisted she took things and told her to come back into the store. Eventually a manager intervened and let her leave. She sued and won $175,000 for false imprisonment. K-Mart appealed. You would expect the court to hold: a. that no false imprisonment took place because the store had "reasonable suspicion" and released her after a short time b. that no violation of privacy took place because her person was not touched c. that a jury could reasonably have found a false imprisonment in this circumstance d. that jury acted with prejudice against the right of the store to protect its property e. the jury award ($175,000) was excessive and had to be cut

d. acted in self-defense once the struggle began, so was not responsible for the accidental shooting

In one case, a man who was drunk wanted to recover money another man owed him. He pulled a gun and, in the course of a struggle, accidentally shot the man who owed the money. The man who was shot sued for battery. A court is likely to hold that the man with the gun: a. did not commit a tort because he was drunk when the shooting happened, so did not have the necessary state of mind b. did not commit battery because the shooting was an accident; he only intended to threaten the man, which may be assault, but he did not intend to shoot him c. committed the tort of battery because he intended to invade Nelson's well-being d. acted in self-defense once the struggle began, so was not responsible for the accidental shooting e. none of the other choices

d. substantial factor

In some states, such as California, proximate cause has been replaced by a negligence rule of liability that holds: A legal cause of injury is a cause which is a(n) _______ in bringing about the injury. a. intervening conduct b. superseding cause c. sine qua non d. substantial factor e. none of the other choices are correct

b. assault

Intentional conduct that places a person in fear of immediate bodily harm or offensive contact is the tort of: a. battery b. assault c. defamation d. duress e. false imprisonment

a. battery

Intentional physical contact without consent may constitute: a. battery b. assault c. defamation d. duress e. false imprisonment

c. willful misconduct

Intentional torts are based on: a. negligence b. carelessness c. willful misconduct d. assumption of care e. obsequiousness

c. concern the interference with personal or property rights

Intentional torts: a. are determined by state statute b. are based on careless actions of defendants c. concern the interference with personal or property rights d. only concern actions that inflict harm on humans e. none of the other choices

b. invasion of privacy

James's employer published a picture of him on the company website without James's permission. James could sue the company for: a. negligence b. invasion of privacy c. emotional distress d. battery e. assault

E. may be torts of assault, battery, and false imprisonment

Joe finds Mary alone in the copy room at work. He closes the door, say "I know you really want me baby," and pins her against the wall, forcing her to be very close to him for 10 minutes while he tells her how much he wants her. She keeps telling him to get away. There: A. is no tort her; the required elements did not occur B. is no tort her because Mary was not injured and she could have ducked under his arms and easily gotten away C. is no tort her because, even though Joe is a jerk in Mary's eyes, he was only kidding and there was no damage D. is no tort here because Mary should know that Joe is not really dangerous, just a jerk E. may be torts of assault, battery, and false imprisonment

c. but Danny will probably successfully argue self-defense

Joe goes to a bar. He gets into an argument with Danny about the merits of Monday Night Football. They start to fight and Joe ends up kissing the barroom floor. Joe can sue Danny: a. for assault and battery and probably win b. for battery only and probably win c. but Danny will probably successfully argue self-defense d. but Danny will probably successfully claim the defense of excused harm e. for damage to reputation because everyone laughed at him

D. battery

Joe walks up behind Mary while at work. Joe grabs Mary and caresses her. Mary thinks Joe is a jerk and has never encouraged him. She runs away. Mary could sue Joe for the tort of: a. invasion of privacy B. libel C. assault D. battery E. false imprisonment

C. battery

John refuses to pay his bill due at a store. The store owner grabs John by the shirt, screams in his face and demands the money "or else". John is shaken but unhurt. John would most likely sue for the tort of: A. slander B. assault C. battery D. negligence E. trespass

d. a competent C.P.A

Joyce Water, Certified Public Accountant (CPA), is sued for negligent preparation of an income tax return. To determine if she was negligent, the court applies a standard of reasonableness which measures Joyce's conduct against that of: a. the I.R.S. Commissioner b. the average person c. the typical member of Congress d. a competent C.P.A e. all of the other choices

C. juries place a high value on the enforcement of legal rights

Juries in tort cases often large sums of money because: A. all tort cases involves serious injury so compensation is always large B. people go on juries consistently dislike business C. juries place a high value on the enforcement of legal rights D. juries lack understanding of how much damages are worth E. none of the other choices

c. lose because danger invites rescue

Kyla negligently starts a fire in a back of her restaurant. Lou is a customer at the restaurant. When he sees the flames filling the kitchen area, he rushes back to the kitchen to help put them out and to help get the kitchen staff out of harm's way. In the process Lou suffers some serious burn. If he sues Kyla, Kyla will: a. win because she didn't ask Lou to help her b. win because Lou was an intermeddler c. lose because danger invites rescue d. lose based on strict liability e. lose because this was an intentional tort

e. lose a suit for a, b, c, or d against Joe

Mary is running for the School Board. Joe tells people that Mary was convicted of prostitution several times. This is true, but the revelation is distressing to Mary who is now successful in business and has put her past behind her. Most likely, Mary will: a. win a libel suit against Joe b. win a slander suit against Joe c. win a false imprisonment suit against Joe d. win a defamation suit against Joe e. lose a suit for a, b, c, or d against Joe

B. intentional infliction of emotional distress

Mary, who has developed a deep hatred of Joe, disguises her voice and calls him one night claiming to be a nurse at a hospital in the city where Joe's parents live and tells him that his parents have just been killed in a car accident. Joe would most likely win a tort suit for: A. assault and battery B. intentional infliction of emotional distress C. libel D. invasion of privacy E. none of the other choices; he cause Mary's behavior

d. win based on strict liability

Mike's is a highway construction company. Mike's is laying a highway through the mountains in West Virginia. At one spot they have to blast a hole through some rocks. Myra is hiking along the side of the road when the explosion occurs. She is thrown down by the explosion and breaks her leg. If she sues Mike's, she will: a. lose based on consent b. lose based on assumption of risk c. lose based on contributory negligence d. win based on strict liability e. will win based on intentionality

d. choices a and b

Negligence is: a. an act that results in harm to another to whom the person owes a duty of care b. an omission that results in harm to another to whom the person owes a duty of care c. a willful omission of material information that leads to injury d. choices a and b e. choices a, b and c

a. we have a duty to conduct ourselves in all situations so as not to create an unreasonable risk of harm or injury to others

Negligence torts are based on the idea that: a. we have a duty to conduct ourselves in all situations so as not to create an unreasonable risk of harm or injury to others b. society owes victims of accidents compensation c. businesses make more money than individuals and so are financially capable of compensating victims of accidents d. if business are not held responsible for injuries caused by carelessness they will become even more careless e. none of the other specific choices

c. in negligence the harmful results of a person's conduct are not intentional

Negligence torts differ from intentional torts in that: a. the government is the prosecutor in negligence torts b. the victim does not receive compensation in a negligence tort case c. in negligence the harmful results of a person's conduct are not intentional d. intentional torts are also felonies e. none of the other choices

a. privilege

On a hot day, you see a baby left in a car while the parents are not to be seen. The child is obviously hot, so you break the window on the car to let air in. The parents sue you for damaging their vehicle. Your defense will likely be: a. privilege b. defense of property c.consent d. self-defense e. all of the other choices may be defenses

b. usually bars the plaintiff from recovery, even if the defendant was negligent

Once established, assumption of risk: a. does not bar the plaintiff from recovery, if the defendant was negligent b. usually bars the plaintiff from recovery, even if the defendant was negligent c. usually bars the plaintiff from recovery, unless the defendant was negligent d. prevents the defendant from having to pay more than half of the damage award e. none of the other choices

b. protect individual rights to solitude and freedom from unwarranted public exposure

One concept behind the tort of invasion of privacy is to: a. encourage the public exposure of true private facts b. protect individual rights to solitude and freedom from unwarranted public exposure c. allow the government to tap telephone conversations d. place criminal sanctions on the use of a person's name without their permission e. protect the publication of "false light" stories

E. invasion of privacy

One day while Phil is out shopping, George searches Phil's home for evidence he could use to blackmail Phil. George finds nothing, cause no damage, and puts everything back in order before he leaves. George could most likely be sued for: A. assault B. false imprisonment C. private nuisance D. disparagement E. invasion of privacy

d. the reasonable person meets

Ordinary care or due care is a standard of care that the law presumes: a. the expert person meets b. the average person meets c. the business owner meets d. the reasonable person meets e. the standard person meets

c. sue Player B for battery because punching is not a normal contact in a soccer game

Player A voluntarily participates in a soccer game and gets punched in the face by Player B. Player A could: a. not sue Player B for battery because in playing soccer, Player A is consenting to all contacts that occur in a game b. not sue Player B for battery because all soccer players sign general liability forms c. sue Player B for battery because punching is not a normal contact in a soccer game d. sue Player B for battery because punching is against the rules in soccer e. none of the other choices

d. that bear a reasonable relationship to the defendant's negligent conduct

Proximate cause limits liability to harms: a. whether foreseeable or not b. resulting from remote occurrences "evolving naturally" from a central event c. that result from non-negligent conduct d. that bear a reasonable relationship to the defendant's negligent conduct e. that arise from interaction with railroads

e. emotional distress

Reckless or outrageous conduct that creates severe mental torment may be the tort of: a. battery b. libel c. slander d. invasion of privacy e. emotional distress

a. Sarah continued to inflict punishment on her attacker once the attacker was helpless

Sarah is attacked by Jane as she is getting her mail from the mailbox. Sarah punches Jane and knocks her unconscious. While Jane is unconscious, Sarah continues to punch her. Sarah will not be able to use self-defense as a defense if Jane sues her for battery because: a. Sarah continued to inflict punishment on her attacker once the attacker was helpless b. Sarah did not warn her attacker that she would continue to beat her, even if the attacker stopped c. Sarah should not have been getting her mail alone d. Sarah will be able to use self-defense e. none of the other choices

d. privilege

Self-defense is a ______ based on the need to allow people who are attacked to take steps to protect themselves. a. proximate cause b. defense c.consent d. privilege e. none of the other choices

a. and possibly win

Senator Hotair, Mary's uncle, has become disgusted with Joe. At a press conference the Senator attacks Joe, calling him names, saying he is a disgusting person and must be crazy. This is printed widely. Joe wants to sue the Senator for defamation. He can sue: a. and possibly win b. but will lose because the Senator is a public figure c. but will lose because Joe is a private figure, so public comments about him are irrelevant d. but will lose because members of Congress have immunity from suits for their statements e. but will lose because of the free speech and debate clause of the Constitution

b. Steve is probably liable due to negligence

Steve has a disorder that causes him to pass out randomly. While driving one day, he passes out, is in an accident, and injures Juan. a. The black-out is an "act of God," so there is no liability b. Steve is probably liable due to negligence c. Steve is probably liable due to contributory negligence d. Steve is probably liable due to strict liability e. Juan is probably liable for being in Steve's way

b. the care expected of a skilled surgeon under the circumstances

Suppose a surgeon is sued for negligence by a patient for having accidentally botched an operation. The standard that applies to the surgeon is the reasonable person, which means: a. strict liability b. the care expected of a skilled surgeon under the circumstances c. the care expected of a reasonable person under the circumstances d. the care expected of any person under the circumstances e. none of the other choices; negligence law does not apply to physicians

b. the sender but not AOL unless AOL was aware of the activity and did not halt it

Suppose someone uses an Internet server, such as AOL, to send a message to others that is defamatory. The person injured by the defamation has a good case against: a. the sender and AOL b. the sender but not AOL unless AOL was aware of the activity and did not halt it c. the sender but not AOL under any circumstances d. neither party; defamation actions from Internet transmissions are shielded by federal law e. neither party; defamation may only occur when the transmission is face-to-face

b. substantial factor

The _____ test states "A legal cause of injury is a cause which is a substantial factor in bringing about the injury." a. considerable factor b. substantial factor c. legal factor d. proximate cause e. sine qua non

a. the injured party knew or should have known of the risks involved in a situation and voluntarily assumes the risk

The assumption of risk defense requires that: a. the injured party knew or should have known of the risks involved in a situation and voluntarily assumes the risk b. the defendant had an "assumption of risk" insurance policy c. the defendant posted warning signs where the victim could have read them d. all of the specific choices e. none of the specific choices

c. protects the members of the press who publish "opinion" material about public figures

The constitutional privilege: a. protects the constitution from defamation b. protects politicians from defamation from the press c. protects the members of the press who publish "opinion" material about public figures d. protects ordinary citizens from attacks on their constitutional rights e. none of the other choices

e. false imprisonment

The intentional detention of a person may be the tort of: a. battery b. assault c. defamation d. duress e. false imprisonment

E. comparative advantage

The doctrine of ____ permits damages to be decreased by the percentage of plaintiffs' injuries caused by plaintiff's negligence: A. substantial factor B. proximate cause C. intentional negligence D. intervening conduct E. comparative advantage

e. decreased by the percentage of plaintiffs' injuries caused by plaintiff's negligence

The doctrine of comparative negligence permits damages to be: a. increased by the magnitude of defendants' wrongdoing b. increased by the amount of plaintiffs' goodwill c. increased by the amount the judge thinks necessary d. decreased by the percentage of defendants' negligence e. decreased by the percentage of plaintiffs' injuries caused by plaintiff's negligence

a. that would be suffered by a reasonable person under the circumstances

The fear of immediate bodily harm that occurs for there to be an assault is fear: a. that would be suffered by a reasonable person under the circumstances b. that was suffered by the plaintiff, as demonstrated by the plaintiff's proof, given the plaintiff's mental condition at the time of the event c. that the plaintiff alleges to have suffered, regardless of the circumstances d. that any "sensitive person" would have suffered under similar circumstances e. that the judge instructs the jury has occurred or not, under the circumstances

b. the difference between the requirements of apprehension of an offensive physical contact and of actual physical contact

The principal distinction between assault and battery is: a. the difference between the plaintiff knowing the defendant and not knowing the defendant b. the difference between the requirements of apprehension of an offensive physical contact and of actual physical contact c. the difference between the requirements of proximate cause and ultimate cause d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

a. legal

The proximate cause of an injury is the cause of the injury. a. legal b. definite c. probable d. most likely e. foreseeable

e. represents a standard of how persons in the relevant community ought to behave

The reasonable person standard compares the actions of the wrongdoer/tortfeasor with those of a hypothetical person known as the reasonable person. The reasonable person: a. represents a standard of how the average American citizen ought to behave b. represents a standard of how the average business CEO ought to behave c. represents a standard of how middle class Americans ought to behave d. represents a standard of how all voting-age Americans ought to behave e. represents a standard of how persons in the relevant community ought to behave

a. ordinary care or due care

The reasonable person standard compares the actions of the wrongdoer/tortfeasor with those of a hypothetical person known as the reasonable person. The standard of care that the law presumes the reasonable person meets is: a. ordinary care or due care b. extraordinary care c. minimal care d. the law presumes no particular standard of care; each case is evaluated individually e. none of the other choices

a. protected by the tort of invasion of privacy, a fairly recent development in tort law

The right to privacy is: a. protected by the tort of invasion of privacy, a fairly recent development in tort law b. strongly protected if one is an entertainer, politician, or other "public personality" c. recognized by courts, even when information about a person is taken from public files and published d. one created by state statute in most states e. all of the other choices

c. but for rule

The sine qua non rule is also known as the: a. but only rule b. not only rule c. but for rule d. but not rule e. none of the other choices

b. the injury would not have occurred but for the conduct of the tortfeasor

The sine qua non rule or but for rule is that: a. the injury would not have occurred if the victim had known the tortfeasor b. the injury would not have occurred but for the conduct of the tortfeasor c. the injury is the fault of the tortfeasor d. the injury occurred because of the tortfeasor's lack of knowledge e. none of the other choices

d. the thing speaks for itself

The term res ipsa loquitur means: a. an event was the cause in fact b. an event was the proximate cause of an injury c. the thing speaks to the court d. the thing speaks for itself e. none of the other choices

c. absolute

The three privileges that may be used as a defense to a defamation action are conditional, constitutional, and: a. Congressional b. conditional per se c. absolute d. legislative e. none of the other choices

a. slander

The tort involving spoken defamatory communication is: a. slander b. libel c. privilege d. negligence e. none of the other choices

c. intentional conduct directed at a person that places the person in fear of immediate bodily harm

The tort of assault is: a. an unlawful and offensive touching b. intentional conduct by a person that is so outrageous that it creates severe mental or emotional distress in another c. intentional conduct directed at a person that places the person in fear of immediate bodily harm d. intentional holding or detaining of a person within boundaries that harms the person's liberty rights e. none of the other choices are correct

a. an insult

The tort of emotional distress protects from conduct that goes beyond the bounds of decency, but not from: a. an insult b. multiple harassing late-night phone calls c. violent threats d. all the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

d. all the other specific choices

The tort of emotional distress protects from conduct that goes beyond the bounds of decency, but not from: a. petty insults b. bad language c. annoying behavior d. all the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

c. peace of mind

The tort of emotional distress protects: a. physical wellbeing b. mental health c. peace of mind d. mental development e. all these interests are protected by the tort of emotional distress

a. involves conduct that is so outrageous that it creates severe mental or emotional distress in another person

The tort of emotional distress: a. involves conduct that is so outrageous that it creates severe mental or emotional distress in another person b. involves private information c. involves confidential medical information d. causes the plaintiff to suffer a mental breakdown e. none of the other choices

E. all of the other choices may be torts of invasion of privacy

The tort of invasion of privacy may be committed in which of the following ways? A. Pepsi uses Tiger Woods' name in its advertising, without his permission B. your employer wiretaps your phone line because he suspects you are a corporate spy C. Mary Smith prints in the company newsletter that you are a cocaine addict D. in a story on domestic violence, the local paper names you as a spouse beater; but that is not true E. all of the other choices may be torts of invasion of privacy

b. libel

The tort of printed or written defamatory communication is: a. slander b. libel c. privilege d. negligence e. none of the other choices

c. there is no fear of harm

There is no assault if: a. there is no mental harm b. there is no physical harm c. there is no fear of harm d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

d. engaged in a voluntary action

To be liable for an intentional tort the defendant must have: a. thought through the consequences of his action b. "considered" the consequences of his actions c. been unaware of the consequences of his actions d. engaged in a voluntary action e. none of the other choices

a. acted voluntarily

To be liable for an intentional tort, the defendant must have: a. acted voluntarily b. acted unknowingly c. acted quickly d. acted in an informed manner e. acted as a reasonable person would under the same circumstances

b. actual malice

To defeat a defense of qualified privilege, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant acted with: a. purpose b. actual malice c. half-hearted malice d. negligence e. none of the other choices

b. knowledge of the consequences

To defeat a defense of qualified privilege, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant acted with: a. purpose b. knowledge of the consequences c. half-hearted malice d. negligence e. none of the other choices

d. what would a reasonable, qualified person have done under the same or similar circumstances?

To determine if a person's conduct was negligent, one asks: a. what would the victim's best friend have done under the same or similar circumstances? b. what would the victim's mother have done under the same or similar circumstances? c. what would the victim have done under the same or similar circumstances? d. what would a reasonable, qualified person have done under the same or similar circumstances? e. none of the other choices

d. all of the other specific choices

To establish the legal requirement of intent for an intentional tort: a. the wrongdoer must have known what he was doing b. the wrongdoer must have known that certain results could occur c. the wrongdoer must have known the possible consequences of his act d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

C. emotional distress

To harass someone with late-night phone calls, profanity, threats, name-calling, and extreme bad behavior could lay the groundwork for the tort of: A. trespass B. battery C. emotional distress D. defamation E. none of the other choices

b. the consequence of the wrongdoing of another

To have a case in tort, the injury sustained by a person must be: a. unreasonably sustained b. the consequence of the wrongdoing of another c. criminal in nature d. based on a privity relationship e. none of the other choices

B. unexpected instances of carelessness or bad behavior

Tort Suits generally come from: A. customer carelessness or ignorance B. unexpected instances of carelessness or bad behavior C. failure to plan for unexpected catastrophes D. natural disasters E. repeated failure to comply with industry regulations

D. all of the other choices

Tort law can be classified as: a. negligent b. intentional c. strict liability d. all of the other choices e. none of the other specific choices

e. all of the other choices

Tort law does NOT: a. impose criminal penalties on the negligent b. ensure the effective operation of the Due Process Clause c. replace the insurance industry d. ensure Equal Protection of the 14th Amendment is operational e. all of the other choices

a. harm from others' unintentional but legally careless conduct

Torts based on negligence protect people from: a. harm from others' unintentional but legally careless conduct b. willful disregard for customer safety c. accidental consumer injury due to the misuse of a product d. all of the specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

a. in some states truth is a complete defense regardless of the purpose or intent in publishing the statement

Truth is an important defense in a defamation suit because: a. in some states truth is a complete defense regardless of the purpose or intent in publishing the statement b. in some states truth is a complete defense if the intent in publishing the statement was not to harm c. if the statement was true, the damage award amount is limited d. if the statement was true, the defendant will not have to pay any damage awards e. none of the other choices

c. comparative negligence

Under the doctrine of ____, damages are reduced by the percentage of the injuries caused by a plaintiff's own careless conduct. a. intervening conduct b. substantial factor c. comparative negligence d. proximate cause e. cause in fact

c. consent in battery

Voluntary participation in a contact sport is an example of: a. consent in participation b. consent to risk taking c. consent in battery d. all of the other specific choices e. none of the other specific choices

c. are allowed in many instances if clear to the party signing one

Waivers of liability or exculpatory clauses: a. are against common law public policy b. are not permitted by statute in most states c. are allowed in many instances if clear to the party signing one d. are allowed in a narrow range of instances when approved by the Restatement of Torts e. none of the other choices

b. getting smashed in the face by a baseball at a baseball game

Which of the following is unlikely to be classified an intentional tort:a. running at a stranger while waving an iron pipe at them b. getting smashed in the face by a baseball at a baseball game c. a man grabs a woman he does not know and kisses her despite her protests d. secretly making tapes of your roommate's phone calls e. all of the other choices are likely to be intentional torts

d. negligence

Which of the following torts protect individuals from harm from the unintentional but legally careless conduct of others: a. strict liability b. hazardous liability c. nuisance d. negligence e. all of the other choices

C. consent

When playing soccer, two players go for the ball at the same time. Player A misses the ball and kicks Player B, whose leg is broken. If B sues A for negligence, A's defense will likely be: A. privilege B. defense of property C. consent D. self-defense E. all of the other choices may be defenses

c. the wrongdoer's actions were motivated by malice

Which is not a necessary element of negligence? a. a causal connection between the wrongdoer's negligent behavior and the resulting harm to the injured party b. the wrongdoer owed the injured party a duty of care c. the wrongdoer's actions were motivated by malice d. the wrongdoer breached a duty of care to the injured party e. the injured party suffered actual harm or damage as a result of the wrongdoer's conduct

d. all of the specific elements mentioned are necessary

Which of the following is (are) necessary elements to prove defamation: a. a false statement about another person b. communication of false statement to another person c. harm is caused to the person about whom the false statement was made d. all of the specific elements mentioned are necessary e. any one of the elements is sufficient to establish a claim

c. an employer tells employees in the same office about the reasons for the dismissal

Which of the following is least likely to be grounds for a suit for defamation by an employee who has been fired for poor performance: a. an employer tells another employer about problems caused by an employee b. an employer tells the media about problems caused by an employee c. an employer tells employees in the same office about the reasons for the dismissal d. all of the other choices are solid reasons for defamation suits likely to be successful e. none of the other choices are solid reasons for defamation suits likely to be successful

b. someone holds a gun at your head while threatening you

Which of the following is most likely to be an example of an assault? a. someone bumps into you while walking down the street b. someone holds a gun at your head while threatening you c. someone beats you up in a fist fight d. someone points a gun at you while you are sleeping e. someone wiretaps your phone

d. helplessness

Which of the following is not a defense that may be raised in case of assault or battery: a. privilege b. defense of property c. consent d. helplessness e. self-defense

e. all of the other choices may be defenses

Which of the following is not a defense that may be raised in case of assault or battery: a. privilege b. defense of property c. consent d. self-defense e. all of the other choices may be defenses

c. loss of ability to work after the statement was made

Which of the following is not a necessary element of defamation: a. making of a false statement about another person b. communication of a false statement to third parties c. loss of ability to work after the statement was made d. harm caused to the victim of the statements e. all of the other choices are necessary conditions

c. mental distress suffered by the victim of the statements

Which of the following is not a necessary element of defamation: a. making of a false statement about another person b. communication of a false statement to third parties c. mental distress suffered by the victim of the statements d. harm caused to the victim of the statements e. all of the other choices are necessary conditions

e. all of the other choices are in that category

Which of the following is not an category of intentional tort: a. assault b. false imprisonment c. battery d. invasion of privacy e. all of the other choices are in that category

b. murder

Which of the following is not an category of intentional tort: a. assault b. murder c. false imprisonment d. battery e. invasion of privacy

c. the wrongdoer intended to invade a protected interest of the injured party

Which of the following is not an element needed to show negligence: a. the wrongdoer owed a duty of care to the injured party b. a duty of care owed to the injured party was breached by an act of the wrongdoer c. the wrongdoer intended to invade a protected interest of the injured party d. there is a causal connection between the injured party's harm and the wrongdoer's conduct e. all of the other choices are necessary elements

e. all of the other choices are necessary elements

Which of the following is not an element needed to show negligence: a. the wrongdoer owed a duty of care to the injured party b. a duty of care owed to the injured party was breached by an act of the wrongdoer c. the injured party suffered harm from legally careless conduct d. there is a causal connection between the injured party's harm and the wrongdoer's conduct e. all of the other choices are necessary elements

c. nuisance

Which of the following is not an intentional tort involving interference with personal rights: a. defamation b. false imprisonment c. nuisance d. mental distress e. malicious prosecution

e. all of the other choices may be intentional torts

Which of the following is not an intentional tort involving interference with personal rights: a. defamation b. false imprisonment c. mental distress d. malicious prosecution e. all of the other choices may be intentional torts

e. all of the other choices are likely to be intentional torts

Which of the following is unlikely to be classified an intentional tort: a. running at a stranger while waving an iron pipe at them b. spreading rumors that someone robbed a bank in the past c. a man grabs a woman he does not know and kisses her despite her protests d. secretly making tapes of your roommate's phone calls e. all of the other choices are likely to be intentional torts

A. a tort of false imprisonment

You are shopping in a department store. A store manger asks you to step into his office. He closes the door and tells you he thinks you have hidden merchandise in your clothing. You say nonsense. He says you will sit there until you confess or allow yourself to be searched. You refuse. He says, "We will see about that!" The two of you sit there for an hour. Finally, he tells you to leave. This is probably: A. a tort of false imprisonment B. not false imprisonment because you could have walked out C. not false imprisonment because no physical force was used D. not false imprisonment but may well be battery E. not false imprisonment because state laws allow store owners to detain shoplifters

C. invasion of privacy

You look at a box of cereal in the grocery store and, to your surprise, see your photo on it. You may probably sue for the tort of: A. assault B. malicious prosecution C. invasion of privacy D. defamation E. none of the other choices

c. assault

You run towards someone screaming and swinging a stick. You were only kidding, but the person you were running at thought you were serious. You might be sued for the tort of: a. invasion of right to privacy b. libel c. assault d. battery e. false imprisonment

d. force reasonable under the circumstances, which would not include shooting the thief

You see someone stealing the highly prized hubcaps off your car. You have the right to protect your property by using: a. deadly force "in case of res judicata" b. "all force necessary" to subdue the thief c. force reasonable under the circumstances, which may include killing the thief d. force reasonable under the circumstances, which would not include shooting the thief e. force reasonable under the circumstances, which would include shooting the thief if you were concerned that the thief could be armed

c. defamation per se

You tell people that someone you dislike is a child molester. This is not true. You most likely committed the tort of: a. libel b. assault c. defamation per se d. invasion of privacy e. malicious prosecution