Blaw 3201 Test 1(ch.7&8)

While driving his car five miles over the speed limit, Carl struck Darla, who was jaywalking across the street. When the case came to trial, the jury determined that Carl was 60% negligent and that Darla was 40% negligent. Darla's injuries are $10,000. This accident occurred in a state following the comparative negligence theory of recovery. a. Darla will recover $10,000. b. Darla will not recover anything. c. Darla will recover $6,000. d. Darla will recover $4,000. have this one on test but diff..

**they have this one but it says that the plaintiff was found 59% negligent which is more than the plaintiff so according to PURE COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE, this plaintiff would not recover an compensation.

Pat and Sally started a charcoal fire for Sally's backyard barbecue and left it uncovered. Then Sally went into the kitchen to make hamburger patties. While Sally was inside, Pat backed up to catch a football and hit the grill, knocking the coals onto his feet. In a modified comparative negligence state, who is liable? a. Sally is liable for ALL of Pat's injuries. b. If Sally is found negligent, Sally is liable for a proportionate share of Pat's injuries unless Pat's negligence was as great as or greater than Sally's. c. Sally is not liable for any of Pat's injuries. d. Sally is liable for Pat's injuries only if Pat was more negligent than Sally.

b. If Sally is found negligent, Sally is liable for a proportionate share of Pat's injuries unless Pat's negligence was as great as or greater than Sally's.

The local supermarket has a large, glass front door which is well lighted and plainly visible. Nelson, who is new in the neighborhood, mistook the glass for an open doorway and walked into it, shattering the door and injuring himself. a. The store is strictly liable to Nelson. b. The store is not liable to Nelson. c. Res ipsa loquitur would require the store to be held liable. d. The store has no duty to Nelson.

b. The store is not liable to Nelson.

A(n) ____ is a non-trespassory invasion of another's interest in the private use and enjoyment of land. a. trespass to real property b. nuisance c. interference with contractual relations d. fraudulent misrepresentation

b. nuisance

The intentional dispossession or unauthorized use of the personal property of another is known as: a. conversion. b. trespass to personal property. c. fraud. d. stealing

b. trespass to personal property.

Adam doesn't like having neighborhood teenagers walk across his yard at night. He rigs an animal trap on the path the teenagers usually use to cross his land. One night, Tim and his friends are walking across the yard when Tim gets caught in the trap. He is taken to the hospital for his injuries. a. Tim is a trespasser on Adam's property, and Adam has the right to use animal traps to strongly discourage anyone from trespassing. b. Adam has no duty toward Tim. c. Adam is not free to inflict intentional injury on a trespasser. d. All of the above.

c. Adam is not free to inflict intentional injury on a trespasser.

Cal sprayed pesticide on his crops in a very careful manner on a windless day. Nevertheless, some of the pesticide spray fell on his neighbor's side of the fence and contaminated the feed for the chickens. The chickens died, and the neighbor sues. What is the likely result? a. Cal is not liable because he was not negligent in his spraying operation. b. Cal is not liable because the neighbor assumed the risk of damage to the feed by placing it so close to the fence. c. Cal is liable because spraying pesticides is an abnormally dangerous activity. d. Cal is not liable for the damage because of contributory negligence.

c. Cal is liable because spraying pesticides is an abnormally dangerous activity.

William, who is a waiter, is injured when an unopened bottle of cola explodes in his hand while he is putting it into the restaurant's cooler. If William wants to sue the bottling company for his injuries: a he will lose, because it will be impossible for him to prove that the bottle was overpressurized by the bottler. b. he will lose, because the bottling company has no duty to him. c. he will probably win if the court allows him to use the res ipsa loquitur doctrine. d. he will win based on the last clear chance rule.

c. he will probably win if the court allows him to use the res ipsa loquitur doctrine.

By law, all apartment buildings in Mary's state must have smoke alarms in the ceilings. If Mary suffers smoke inhalation because the smoke alarm in her apartment building was not yet installed and Mary sues the owner for negligence, Mary would have to prove: a.a duty existed toward her. b. a breach of that duty. c. injury and causation. d. All of the above.

c. injury and causation.

If a statute is found to be applicable to a fact situation, then the courts will hold that an unexcused violation of that statute which causes an injury to another is: a. strict liability. b. res ipsa loquitur. c. negligence per se. d. assumption of the risk.

c. negligence per se.

Which of the following is/are considered in determining the application of the reasonable person standard? a. Physical disability. b. Superior skill or knowledge. c. Emergency circumstances. d. All of the above are considered.

d. All of the above are considered.

Defenses to intentional torts include: a. self-defense and consent. b. defense of others and consent. c. self-defense and defense of property. d. All of the above are valid defenses.

d. All of the above are valid defenses.

Stella goes to Ranger's Department Store to look for clothes. The store is in the process of remodeling, and there is a lot of clutter in the aisle. Stella trips over the clutter and breaks her leg. What standard of care does the store have toward Stella under the circumstances? a. None, because she came to the store voluntarily. b. The store owes her a duty of only ordinary care, because she is a trespasser. c. Because she is a licensee, the store must warn her of hazards of which the store knows but which Stella is not likely to discover. d. Because Stella is a business visitor, the store must exercise reasonable care to protect her against dangerous conditions she is unlikely to discover.

d. Because Stella is a business visitor, the store must exercise reasonable care to protect her against dangerous conditions she is unlikely to discover.

Mark is out sailing in his boat one evening when he hears a young girl crying for help in the lake. Which of the following is true? a. Mark MUST help the girl or he will be liable for negligence. b. Mark must help the girl ONLY if he knows her. c. Mark MUST help the girl if he is the girl's uncle. d. Mark MUST help the girl if he begins to rescue her and moves her to a position farther from the shore.

d. Mark MUST help the girl if he begins to rescue her and moves her to a position farther from the shore.

An absolute privilege exists to protect which of the following defendants in defamation cases? a. Members of Congress on the floor of Congress b. Statements made by the U.S. President in the discharge of official duty c. Statements about third persons made to one's spouse when they are alone d. All of the above.

d. all of the above

The intentional exercise of dominion or control over another's personal property which so seriously interferes with the other's right of control as to justly require the payment of full value for the property is: a. trespass to personal property. b. interference with economic interests. c. fraudulent misrepresentation. d. None of the above.

d. none of the above

A photographer taking photos of a movie star with a telephoto lens would NOT be guilty of intrusion if: a. the photographer never entered onto the movie star's property. b. the pictures were not published. c. the movie star was in bed at the time. d. the movie star was in a public building at the time.

d. the movie star was in a public building at the time.

Which of the following can be raised as a defense to a claim of defamation? a. That the statement was true. b. That there was a constitutional privilege to comment about the plaintiff who is a public figure and that the statement was made without malice. c. That there was a conditional privilege to make defamatory comment on another's statements in order to protect legitimate self-interest. d. All of the above.

D. All of the above

In order to sue for battery, a plaintiff must prove that he or she has received a physical injury.

False

T/F: A defendant will be liable for all harm that can be traced back to the defendant's negligence.

False

T/F: A person who falls asleep while driving would not be liable for any resulting injury since it would be an unavoidable accident.

False

T/F: If a raccoon gets loose from a cage and harms someone, the owner can escape liability by showing that he took great care to keep the animal confined.

False

Tort law is primarily criminal law.

False(common law)

T/F: A blind person will be held to the standard of care of a reasonable blind person rather than that of the reasonable sighted person for purposes of determining negligence.

True

T/F: In applying the reasonable person standard, the court takes into account a person's physical, but not mental, handicaps.

True

T/F: In determining a defendant's liability for negligence, his or her superior skill or knowledge will be attributed in applying the reasonable person standard, thus increasing the chance that the defendant may be held liable.

True

An action for negligence consists of five elements, each of which the plaintiff must prove. These elements include: a. harm. b. res ipsa loquitur. c. a reasonable person. d. All of the above.

a. harm.

Violation of a statute designed to protect underage, unlicensed drivers, as well as innocent third parties, from the consequences of juvenile car theft and "joy riding" by prohibiting car owners from leaving the keys in their cars if the cars are unattended, is likely to be characterized as: a. negligence per se. b. res ipsa loquitur. c. contributory negligence. d. assumption of risk.

a. negligence per se.

Mary's car was parked just outside the east door of the Civic Center. When she tried to exit, three ominous-looking gang members were blocking that door. She called the police who arrested the three for loitering. If Mary brings suit against them for false imprisonment: a.she will lose if there was another exit she could have used. b. she will lose because she was not harmed by the confinement. c. she will win even if there was another way out because she was, in effect, being confined to the Civic Center. d. she will win because they were blocking her passage to her car.

a.she will lose if there was another exit she could have used.

Oscar, who was driving too fast for conditions, collided with a truck carrying explosives. The truck was unmarked, so Oscar had no way of knowing what it contained. The collision caused an explosion, which shattered glass in a building a block away. The glass injured Ida, who was working inside the building. John, who was walking down the street near the site of the collision, was seriously burned as a result of the explosion. a. Oscar's negligent driving is the proximate cause of Ida's injury. b. Oscar's negligent driving is the proximate cause of John's injury. c. Both Ida and John are within the zone of danger of the collision. d. All of the above. diff on test

**this one is a little different, says John is hurt who is 60 feet away and Ida was hurt from a light pole falling in a nearby intersection, question asks who is Oscar liable for. I just said he was liable for John because he was in proximate cause (tells you to use what you found from the Railroad case so this is about SCOPE OF LIABILITY)