torts midterm q
10 Diana is a passenger in a car driven by Henri Paul, whose negligence causes an accident, injuring himself. Diana, uninjured and for no particular reason, accompanies Henri to the hospital in a fast ambulance. The ambulance is hit by a car driven by Dodi, injuring Diana. Diana files a suit against Henri, whose best defense is: A. Assumption of risk B. Contributory negligence C. Negligence per se D. Superseding cause
A
17 Christy, a nurse, hires Adam, an accountant, to handle her accounts. Dissatisfied with Adam's work, Christy sues him, alleging negligence. Adam may successfully defend against the suit by proving that he: A. Did not injure Christy in any way. B. Does not know every principle of accounting. C. Performed as well as an ordinary person could have. D. Performed as well as Christy could have.
A
24 Stu got into his car, released the brake, and prior to starting the engine, left it on a slight incline in order to pick up a broken bottle lying in the path of the car. The car started to roll in Stu's direction. Tom, a nearby bystander, noticing that Stu was oblivious to his peril, pushed him out of the path of the approaching car. Tom was then struck by the car and was seriously injured. Stu lost his balance from being pushed by Tom, struck his head on the curbstone, and was injured. In the action by Tom against Stu for his injury, Stu's best defense is: A. That Stu could not reasonably foresee that the incline was of sufficient angle to cause an un-braked car to roll. B. That Tom was not a person within the risk of injury from Stu's act. C. That Stu could not reasonably foresee that a slowly rolling automobile would cause serious injury. D. That Stu had not created a risk of injury to any third person in front of the automobile and therefore cannot be liable to Tom.
A
25 Abbott and Costello were in the habit of playing practical jokes on each other on their respective birthdays. On Abbott's birthday, Costello sent Abbott a cake containing an ingredient that he knew had, in the past, made Abbott very ill. After Abbott had eaten a piece of the cake, he suffered severe stomach pains and had to be taken to the hospital by ambulance. On the way to the hospital, the ambulance driver suffered a heart attack, which caused the ambulance to swerve from the road and hit a tree. As a result of the collision, Abbott suffered a broken leg. In a suit by Abbott against Costello to recover damages for Abbott's broken leg, Abbott will: A. Prevail, because Costello knew that the cake would be harmful or offensive to Abbott. B. Prevail, only if the ambulance driver was negligent. C. Not prevail, because Costello could not reasonably be expected to foresee injury to Abbott's leg. D. Not prevail, because the ambulance driver's heart attack was a superseding cause of Abbott's broken leg.
A
4 A managed care company was found liable for denying valid claims for health insurance coverage. The company was ordered to pay compensatory damages to a group of plaintiffs. To "make an example" of the insurer, the court also ordered the insurer to pay an additional $10 million to deter other insurers from engaging in the same wrongful acts. The $10 million award is an example of: A. Punitive damages B. Economic damages C. Non-economic damages D. Collateral source payments
A
40 Last month, Ingrid had a swimming pool and a cabana constructed in her spacious backyard. The pool was totally within the confines of Ingrid's property. But the cabana extended a few inches onto the neighbor's property. At the time of construction, nobody knew that the cabana extended onto the neighbor's property: not Ingrid, not the neighbor, not the construction company. Does the neighbor have a cause of action for trespass? A. Yes, because the cabana extends onto the neighbor's property. B. Yes, because the presence of the cabana on the neighbor's land has caused damage to his property. C. No, because Ingrid did not actually enter the neighbor's property. D. No, because the landowner did not intend to have the cabana encroach on the neighbor's property.
A
Establishing that the tort of negligence has been committed requires four requirements to be met. Which one of the following is NOT a requirement? a) The defendant must know, or should have known, that he owed the claimant a duty of care. b) The defendant must owe the claimant a duty of care. c) The loss sustained by the claimant must not be too remote. d) The defendant's breach of duty must cause the claimant loss.
A
Hospital X was sued for the negligence of its nursing staff, when on a particular shift, six visitors were allowed to visit a patient, though the hospital's policy is no more than two visitors per patient. As a result of the crowd, additional chairs were brought into the room from a waiting area and a chair was accidentally placed with the leg blocking off an IV line supplying medication to the patient. The patient developed complications from the lack of medication and ultimately was forced to spend significant additional time in the hospital as a result. Under the claim of negligence, the plaintiff must prove the nursing staff a. knew or should have known there was a likelihood of injury to the patient. b. knew or should have known there was a substantial certainty that the patient would suffer injury. c. acted with reckless disregard for the safety of patients. d. was responsible for the injury to the patient regardless of whether it was intended or not.
A
What is criminal negligence? A. The death of a patient caused by a doctor's grossly negligent act or omission B. The death of a patient during an operative procedure C. The death of a patient that requires reporting to the coroner D. Any criminal act done by a doctor against a patient
A
When can a claimant recover damages for 'pure economic loss?' a) Where the defendant has made a negligent misstatement that causes the claimant to sustain pure economic loss. b) Where the claimant's pure economic loss was sustained as a result of defective property. c) Where the defendant is aware that his act of negligence could cause pure economic loss. d) Where the pure economic loss was caused by the defendant's omission.
A
Which of the following is true about vicarious liability? A. An employer can be held liable for the negligence of its employees during the course of their employment B. An employee must have been in employment for a least one year C. The negligence must have been of a very serious nature D. All of the above
A
Which statement(s) is(are) true with regard to defenses against liability claims? I. Under contributory negligence, if you contribute to your injury, you cannot recover damages. II. Under comparative negligence, if you contribute to your injury, you cannot recover damages. A. I only B. II only C. Both I and II D. Neither I nor II
A
T/F A patient who can prove the elements of an intentional tort by a health care provider is entitled to recovery, regardless of whether any damage was suffered.
False
T/F Strict liability is used only in products liability cases.
False
11 Linda, a driver for Swift Transportation, causes a five-car accident on an interstate highway. Linda and Swift are liable to: A. All those who are injured. B. Only those whose injuries could reasonably have been foreseen. C. Only those whose cars were immediately ahead and behind Linda's vehicle. D. Only those who do not have insurance.
B
15 In Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., the court decided that the railroad's conduct was not wrong in relation to Palsgraf but did NOT decide whether the conduct was negligent toward the man with the package (that led to Palsgraf's injury). If the court HAD determined that the railroad employee was negligent with regard to the man with the package, would the railroad have been liable for the injury to Palsgraf? A. Yes, because negligence to one party creates negligence to all other parties injured as a result. B. No, because Palsgraf's injury was still not foreseeable. C. Yes, because of the doctrine of assumption of risk. D. No, because Palsgraf was also negligent.
B
18 Calista was injured when she drove her car through a stop sign and was struck by Harrison's car. Harrison saw Calista and could have stopped. However, he failed to do so since he had the right-of-way. Calista can recover damages from Harrison under which of the following legal doctrines? A. Vicarious liability B. Last clear chance rule C. Contributory negligence D. Assumption of risk doctrine
B
19 Paula locks Tony in a ground floor room. Tony sues Paula for false imprisonment. Which of the following is true? A. Paula would escape liability if she let Tony out of the room after one hour. B. According to some courts, Paula would escape liability if Tony slept through the entire period that the door was locked and thus was unaware that he was being detained. C. Even if Tony could easily have escaped through an open window, Paula still is liable. D. Paula would not be liable if Tony could have escaped by traveling two miles through a narrow, filthy, rat- infested sewer line that periodically floods with water.
B
26 An ordinance of the city of Wilmington, DE prohibits parking on pedestrian crosswalks. Justin parked his car on against the curb but on a crosswalk running across Concord Pike in violation of the ordinance. A car driven negligently by Hammond ran into Justin's car while it was parked in the crosswalk, injuring King, a passenger in Hammond's car. King has asserted claims for his injuries both against Hammond for negligent driving and against Justin for parking his car in the crosswalk in violation of the crosswalk ordinance. Will King prevail in his suit against Justin? A. Yes, because parking in violation of the crosswalk ordinance was negligence per se. B. Yes, if King would not have been injured had Justin's car not been parked in the crosswalk. C. No, because Justin's parked car was not an active or efficient cause of King's injury. D. No, if prevention of traffic accidents was not a purpose of the ordinance.
B
28 A worker at a New Jersey oil refinery was severely burned when a pipe carrying hot oil exploded. The worker brought a negligence action against the company that manufactured the pipe. At trial, the worker established what happened and the injuries he suffered. He also presented evidence that the pipe burst because it had corroded at a higher than normal rate, which according to testimony of the worker's experts indicated a defect in the manufacture of the pipe. At the close of the worker's case, the manufacturer moved for a directed verdict. The court should: A. Deny the motion, because the jury could find that the premature corrosion of the pipe would not have occurred absent negligence by the manufacturer. B. Grant the motion, because the worker has not established that the manufacturer was negligent. C. Grant the motion, because the pipe was not in the manufacturer's possession when it exploded.
B
30 Eileen was driving to her University of Maryland law school class in a car that she knew did not have operating headlights. On the way to class, Eileen was rear-ended by another driver who had been driving 25 mph over the posted speed limit. Eileen suffered personal injuries and her car was damaged. Maryland follows traditional contributory negligence rules and makes it a misdemeanor to drive a vehicle that does not have operating headlights. If Eileen brings an action against the driver, will she prevail? A. Yes, because the misdemeanor statute is intended to protect against cars being driven without headlights. B. Yes, because the other driver's violation of the speeding statute constituted negligence per se. C. No, because Eileen violated the misdemeanor statute. D. No, because Eileen has not established that driving 25 mph over the speed limit created an unreasonable risk of injury to others.
B
31 A security guard negligently locked a door that Paul intended to use to exit the building, so Paul was forced to use a different exit. As Paul stepped outside onto the sidewalk, a car careened out of control and jumped the curb up onto the sidewalk. The car struck and injured Paul. Paul has sued the security guard for his injuries. At trial, the parties stipulated that the guard was negligent in locking the door. Paul also established that if he had exited from the locked door (as he intended to), he would not have been injured. At the end of Paul's case, the security guard moved for a directed verdict. The court should: A. Grant the motion, because the driver of the car was the actual cause of Paul's injuries. B. Grant the motion, because the car was an unforeseeable intervening force. C. Deny the motion, because the jury could find that but for the guard's negligence, Paul would not have been injured. D. Deny the motion, because the jury could find that the guard's negligence was a foreseeable cause of Paul's injury.
B
T/F The element of forseeability requires a health care provider to anticipate every possible outcome of his or her conduct
False
34 Keanu was jogging along the Brandywine biking/jogging trail. Suddenly, a driver pulled out of an alley perpendicular to the trail and failed to stop at a stop sign. The driver hit Keanu with her car, injuring him. Keanu sued the driver. A Wilmington, DE ordinance provides that drivers must stop at all stop signs perpendicular to the biking/jogging trail. On the basis of which standard of care will the driver probably be judged? A. That of a reasonable and prudent person under the facts of the situation B. The standard set by the city ordinance C. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, because it can be presumed that nobody would fail to stop at a stop sign in the absence of negligence D. The standard established by qualified expert witnesses
B
6 A state statute requires machinery in industrial plants to include automatic shutoff switches accessible to each employee working on the machine. Provinzano Piping's equipment does not have these switches. Jason, a Provinzano employee, suffers an injury that an accessible shut-off switch would have prevented. Jason's best theory for recovery against Provinzano is: A. Assumption of risk B. Negligence per se C. Res ipsa loquitur D. Battery
B
A legal theory that holds an employer responsible for the tortious acts of an employee is known as a. strict superior liability. b. respondeat superior. c. contractual employer liability. d. None of the above.
B
Dr. J was a small-town optometrist whose entire practice consisted of the diagnosis of basic levels of sight, as well as prescribing eyeglasses and contact lenses. All conditions suspected of disease were referred to an ophthalmologist who had a medical degree and specialized training. However, on one occasion Dr. J treated a long-time patient who had developed eye problems and prescribed eye patches and antibiotic ointments. In actuality, the patient suffered from a rare form of cancer of the eye. In reliance on Dr. J's skills, the patient sought no other treatment. The patient died as a result of the cancer. Dr. J could likely be sued for a. intentional tort of abandonment. b. negligence. c. strict liability. d. None of the above.
B
The "but for" test means that: A. "But for" the negligence the claimant would have suffered the injuries or harm in question B. "But for" the negligence the claimant would not have suffered the injuries or harm in question C. "But for" the negligence the claimant might have suffered the injuries or harm in question D. "But for" the negligence the claimant could have suffered the injuries or harm in question
B
The case of Caparo Industries plc v Dickman established the requirements for the existence of a duty of care. Which one of the following is NOT a requirement? a) In order for a duty of care to arise, the damage sustained by the claimant must be foreseeable. b) In order for a duty of care to arise, the defendant must realise that his actions could cause harm to another. c) In order for a duty of care to arise, the claimant must be sufficiently proximate. d) In order for a duty of care to arise, it must be fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty.
B
The standard of care in cases of medical negligence is measured against: A. The most recent medical research evidence available B. What is expected of a reasonable doctor C. What the majority of doctors would recommend D. The standard of experts in the field
B
What is 'pure economic loss?' a) Financial loss that is caused by physical injury. b) Financial loss that is not associated with physical injury or property damage. c) Financial loss that is caused by psychiatric injury. d) Financial loss that is caused by damage to property.
B
2 Amanda needed surgery on her right knee. When the anesthesia wore off after the operation, she noticed surgical wrapping around both knees. When she asked the nurse why both knees were wrapped, the nurse replied that the surgeon made an incision on her left knee, discovered the mistake, and proceeded with the operation on the right knee. What modification of the law of negligence will Amanda probably be able to invoke to recover damages from the surgeon? A. Contributory negligence B. Negligence per se C. Res ipsa loquitur D. Comparative negligence
C
22 Harry knew that the brakes on his car were in poor shape. They had been squeaking for months and over the past few weeks, it had become harder and harder to stop the car. Nevertheless, Harry continued driving. One day, as he was driving with proper attention and within the speed limit down Pennsylvania Avenue, a 6-year old named Truman suddenly jumped out from behind a parked car right in front of Harry's car. Harry jammed on his brakes but was unable to stop in time. As a consequence, Harry ended up running into (and over) Truman, causing him personal injuries. It will be stipulated at trial that Truman jumped out from behind the parked car so suddenly and so close to Harry's car that he would have suffered the same injuries even had Harry's brakes been properly adjusted. If Harry is sued in negligence for Truman's injuries, can Truman establish a prima facie case? A. Yes, because Harry's breach of duty in not keeping his brakes properly serviced was the proximate cause of Truman's injuries. B. Yes, because Harry should reasonably have foreseen that he might cause an accident by not being able to stop in time. C. No, because Harry's breach of duty in not keeping his brakes properly serviced was not the cause-in-fact of Truman's injuries. D. No, because Harry's breach of duty in not keeping his brakes properly serviced was not the proximate cause of Truman's injuries.
C
27 Ernie let his roommate borrow his car for the specific purpose of picking up some cheesesteaks that the roommates ordered for dinner. The roommate drove to the mall where the cheesesteak store was located and parked there. Instead of going directly to the cheesesteak store, the roommate went into a record store, browsed, and purchased a CD. The roommate then went to the cheesesteak store and picked up the order which had been ready for 15 minutes. Just as the roommate left the store to return to Ernie's car, another car struck Ernie's car, causing extensive damage. If Ernie sues roommate on a negligence theory, who will prevail? A. Ernie, because roommate exceeded the scope of his authority when he went to the record store. B. Ernie, because but for the roommate's delay in getting the cheesesteaks, Ernie's car would not have been damaged. C. Roommate, because he did not create a foreseeable risk of damage to Ernie's car. D. Roommate, because roommate did not have the requisite intent to cause dispossession or damage to the chattel.
C
3 All of the following are legal defenses to liability claims EXCEPT: A. Contributory negligence B. Assumption of the risk C. Vicarious liability D. Comparative negligence
C
33 Hussein brought in his car for scheduled maintenance. The mechanic certified that the car was in perfect working order. Later that day, Hussein was driving over the speed limit when his brakes failed, causing his car to strike a pedestrian. If the pedestrian brings an action against the mechanic, what will be the probable outcome? A. Judgment for mechanic, because Hussein's negligence was an independent, superseding cause B. Judgment for mechanic, because the pedestrian was a bystander C. Judgment for pedestrian, if the mechanic was negligent in inspecting the car
C
36 Sarah was driving carefully but with a just-expired vehicle emissions registration, in violation of a state statute. When Sarah stopped at a stop sign, another driver, who was speeding, crashed into her car. Sarah suffered injuries and sued the other driver. The fact that Sarah had an expired registration would not affect her claim because: A. The defendant's negligence occurred after Sarah's. B. The defendant should have known that there are some unregistered vehicles, like Sarah's, on the road. C. The prevention of accidents of this sort is not the reason that drivers are required to renew their registration. D. There is a greater chance of causing injury when a driver speeds than when a person drives with an expired registration.
C
A legal theory that imposes liability based on a willful failure to provide care, treatment, or services as promised in exchange for payment would be considered a. negligence. b. strict liability. c. contractual liability. d. intentional tort.
C
Documentation of the fact that a physical therapist knew or should have known that forcing a patient into physical movement for treatment of an injury before tests confirming the nature and extent of the injury were complete would be evidence of the element of a. foreseeability. b. damage. c. res ipsa loquitur. d. the extent of duty.
C
Generally, the standard of care expected of a person is judged objectively. However, in certain situations, the courts will allow elements of subjectivity into their deliberations. Which one of the following is NOT such a situation? a) Where the defendant has some relevant special skill or expertise. b) Where the defendant is a child. c) Where the defendant suffers a sudden disabling event and is aware of the effect that the event has had. d) Where the defendant is mentally or physically disabled or incapacitated. e) Where the defendant acts in an emergency.
C
Karen suffered a fall and went to an emergency room for treatment. Her diagnosis was a compound fracture of the left arm. She was taken to surgery. The fracture was set, and while under anesthesia, her arm was placed in a cast. After leaving, she followed all directions given by the treating physician. After six weeks the cast was removed and it was obvious that the arm was grossly deformed. Karen's best option would be to file an action using which theory? a. Strict liability b. Negligence c. Negligence with res ipsa loquitur d. Intentional tort
C
Mike S. is a respiratory therapist who provides care at several different hospitals. He works subject to a biannual contract approximately two days per week at each hospital for a fee based on the number of patients for which he provides treatment. He receives no employee benefits, and for tax purposes no taxes are withheld. He claims himself as self-employed on his tax return. He pays for a policy of liability insurance. When he is at work, he is directed to the particular patients and provides the treatments recommended by the physician orders in the hospital chart. He is fully responsible for providing the treatment and charting the patient response to treatment. He generally provides treatments without supervision or presence of hospital personnel or physicians. If he were sued for malpractice in delivery of services, Mike's employment status would most likely be that of a. physician employee of the physician of the patient. b. hospital employee. c. independent contractor. d. None of the above.
C
Regarding liability in negligence for an omission, which one of the following statements is untrue? a) Generally, the law relating to negligence does not impose liability on a person for an omission b) Liability may arise where a defendant is liable for the actions of a third party and the defendant fails to prevent the third party from harming another c) An individual who witnesses the commission of a tort, but fails to prevent it or inform the relevant authorities, will commit a negligent omission d) A defendant may be liable in negligence for an omission if he undertook responsibility to prevent the harm in question
C
Res ipsa loquitur is the legal theory applied exclusively to cases involving a. defective medical products. b. intentional tort. c. negligence. d. respondeat superior.
C
When determining whether a breach of duty has taken place, the courts will take into account a number of factors. Which one of the following is NOT a relevant factor? a) The usefulness of the defendant's conduct. b) The seriousness of the injury. c) The ease with which the damage sustained can be financially assessed. d) The likelihood of injury. e) The cost of precautions.
C
12 In Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., 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?
D
16 Milo invites Morton into her apartment. Morton commits trespass to land if he: A. Enters the apartment with fraudulent intent. B. Harms the apartment in any way. C. Makes disparaging remarks about Milo to others. D. Refuses to leave when Milo asks him to go.
D
20 Smitha goes diving during her Carnival Cruise. Carnival has Smitha sign a waiver form indicating that, if she is injured by a shark, she cannot sue Carnival. Smitha was bitten by a shark during her dive. Smitha sues Carnival. Carnival's best defense is A. Comparative negligence B. Contributory negligence C. Implied assumption of risk D. Express assumption of risk
D
29 Farmer Brown hired Allied Movers to move his collection of antique Amish farming tools to a new farmhouse. The movers, wanting to move everything in a single trip, loaded the open bed truck too high. Several iron rakes and shovels crashed to the ground. However, they were not even scratched or dented. If Brown brings a negligence action against the movers, he can recover: A. Nominal damages B. Punitive damages C. Both nominal damages and punitive damages D. Neither nominal damages nor punitive damages
D
7 Karen slips and falls in WallMart and is injured. Karen files a suit against WallMart for $500,000. Under a "pure" comparative negligence rule, Karen could recover damages from WallMart: A. Only if both parties were equally at fault B. Only if Karen was less at fault than WallMart C. Only if Karen was more at fault than WallMart D. Only if Karen was less than 100% at fault
D
A duty of care between a doctor and patient will exist if: A. The doctor is a city GP and the patient resides in that city B. Between the doctor and parent where the patient is an infant C. Provided that, on the facts, the Caparo test is not satisfied D. If it is fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty in the circumstances
D
A legal theory that imposes liability on those who are engaged in ultrahazardous activity is known as a. gross negligence. b. intentional tort. c. contractual liability. d. strict liability.
D
In a case of medical negligence a claimant can succeed only if it is established on the balance of probabilities: A. That the doctor breached the duty of care owed to the patient B. That the breach caused legally recognised injury to the patient C. That the doctor owed a duty of care to the patient D. All the above
D
In rescue, or 'good Samaritan' situations: A. A duty of care will never arise B. A duty of care will always arise C. A duty of care will arise only if that patient is known to the doctor D. Doctors who fail to offer to offer care in emergency situations could face disciplinary action from the General Medical Council
D
Negligence does not require proof of a. breach of the standard of care. b. proximate cause. c. compensatory damage. d. foreseeable, substantial certainty of injury.
D
There are numerous examples of duties of care. Which one of the following is NOT a situation where the courts have established that a duty of care exists? a) Motorists owe a duty of care to nearby pedestrians. b) Manufacturers of products owe a duty of care to the ultimate users of those products. c) Employers owe a duty of care to their employees to take reasonable care for their safety. d) An auditor of a company's accounts owes a duty to care to anyone who might read his report based on those accounts.
D
What is a 'secondary victim?' a) A person who sustains physical injury due to an incident caused by another's negligence, but the injury sustained is less than injuries suffered by others. b) A person who sustains psychiatric injury as a result of being involved in an incident caused by the defendant's negligence. c) A person who sustains physical injury due to an incident caused by another's negligence. d) A person who witnesses, or is told about, another's negligence, but who does not fear for his physical safety.
D
T/F Res ipsa loquitur can be applied in cases of negligence where the evidence of causation is inaccessible to the plaintiff
True
