BUL Unit 4 Exam 1

Fraudulent misrepresentation imposes liability for: a. monetary loss. b. justifiable reliance. c. a misrepresented fact intentionally made for the purpose of inducing the person to rely on it. d. All of these are correct.

d. All of these are correct.

The intentional exercise of dominion or control over the personal property of another that so seriously interferes with the other's right to control is known as: a. conversion. b. trespass to personal property. c. nuisance. d. larceny.

a. conversion.

Rex was burning leaves in his backyard. One of the burning leaves was lifted by the wind into Gary's yard next door. It landed on the lawn mower which exploded, setting fire to the wooden lawn furniture. Rex's best argument against liability to Gary would be: a. it was not foreseeable that the lawn mower would explode. b. the damage was not caused by the leaf but by the gasoline. c. the leaf was not a substantial factor in causing the damage. d. the gasoline in the lawn mower is a superseding cause of the damage.

a. it was not foreseeable that the lawn mower would explode.

Karen idolizes her roommate, Cindy. She uses Cindy's picture in an advertising campaign at the dress shop where Karen works. Karen did not ask for Cindy's permission or pay her anything. Karen is: a. liable of appropriation. b. is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. c. liable of libel. d. cannot be subject to a lawsuit brought by Cindy. Cindy should be flattered.

a. liable of appropriation.

Misuse of legal procedure consists of: a. malicious prosecution. b. wrongful criminal proceedings. c. intrusion. d. All of these are correct.

a. malicious prosecution.

Sometimes the reasonable person standard of conduct may be established by legislation. An unexcused violation of that statute which causes an injury to another is: a. negligence per se. b. supervening event. c. res ipsa loquitur. d. contributory negligence.

a. negligence per se.

The tort of appropriation requires all, except: a. publication. b. unauthorized use. c. of another person's name or likeness. d. for one's own benefit.

a. publication.

Find a dead mouse at the bottom of a freshly opened bottle of soda pop is an example of when ____________ may be applied. a. res ipsa loquitur . b. battery. c. assault. d. ipso facto

a. res ipsa loquitur .

Helen is friends with Nuncio. Helen and Nuncio are in a general education class together at a local college. Nuncio did not call her to study for a test when he said he would. Helen sees Nuncio in class the next day, but he doesn't acknowledge her. Helen is so mad that she wrote a defamatory post on Nuncio's Facebook page. Five mutual friends "liked" Helen's post. Helen has committed: a. the tort of libel. b. neither libel nor slander, because there has been no publication of the post. c. the opinion that Helen posted was a matter or absolute privilege. d. the tort of slander.

a. the tort of libel.

In Palsgraf v. Long Island RR. Co., the main issue in this case was: a. whether the actions of the rail road employees, assisting a passenger to board a moving train, violated the rights of Mrs. Palsgraf. b. whether the train platform was negligently constructed leading to Mrs. Palsgraf's injury. c. whether the railroad employees were negligent in how they helped the male passenger on to the train. d. whether the train was moving too fast at the time the man boarded the train

a. whether the actions of the rail road employees, assisting a passenger to board a moving train, violated the rights of Mrs. Palsgraf.

If an activity causes a foreseeable and highly significant risk of physical harm even when reasonable care is exercised by all actors, and the activity is not one of common usage, it is: a. proximate cause. b. abnormally dangerous. c. res ipsa loquitur. d. None of these are correct.

b. abnormally dangerous.

The injurious falsehood which imposes liability upon one who publishes a false statement that results in harm to another's monetary interests, is the tort of: a. defamation. b. fraudulent misrepresentation. c. disparagement. d. false light.

. disparagement.

Paul and Sasha started a grill with charcoal for Sasha's backyard barbecue and left it uncovered. Then Sasha went into the kitchen to tenderize the meat. While Sasha was inside, Paul leaned over to pull a weed out of the grass and hit the grill, knocking the coals onto his leg. In a pure comparative negligence state, who is liable? a. Sasha is liable for Paul's injuries in proportion to the degree of fault or negligence found against her. b. Sasha is liable for ALL of Paul's injuries. c. Paul's negligence bars any recovery from Sasha. d. Sasha is liable for Paul's injuries because it is her house.

a. Sasha is liable for Paul's injuries in proportion to the degree of fault or negligence found against her.

Sarah is having a new sidewalk installed in front of her home. She negligently leaves the public sidewalk without a fence, sign, or other warning while under excavation. During the evening, Zach falls into the hole in the sidewalk. The darkness of night is: a. an intervening cause of harm to Zach. b. a superseding cause of harm to Zach. c. a risk that Zach assumes. d. makes Zach contributorily negligent.

a. an intervening cause of harm to Zach.

The intentional infliction of harmful or offensive bodily contact is the tort of: a. battery. b. assault. c. false imprisonment. d. infliction of emotional distress.

a. battery.

Steve had an insurance policy with Sentinel Insurance. He experienced a loss at his home due to a weather related claim. Sentinel Insurance denied coverage for the damage on Steve's house. A week later Steve threw a bomb into the office of his insurance agent, intending to kill the agent because the company had disallowed his claim. The agent wasn't in the building, but the bomb seriously injured his secretary, who was working in the office (and was unaware that Steve was outside the office at the time). Steve: a. can be sued by the secretary for her injuries based on an intentional tort cause of action because Steve's intent to harm the agent is transferred to the secretary. b. cannot be liable for any torts because his aim was bad. c. has committed the tort of assault. d. has committed a crime and can only be sued for the tort if he is found guilty of the crime.

a. can be sued by the secretary for her injuries based on an intentional tort cause of action because Steve's intent to harm the agent is transferred to the secretary.

Roger fires a gun in the middle of the desert. He intends to fire the gun, but has no reason to believe anyone else is in the area. Little does Roger know, but Dalton is standing in the distance and can see Roger aim the gun in his direction. Seeing this causes Dalton fear of imminent injury. If the bullet hits Dalton: a. Dalton can sue Roger for the tort of battery. b. Dalton can sue Roger for both assault and battery. c. Dalton can sue Roger for the tort of assault. d. Roger has committed the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress.

b. Dalton can sue Roger for both assault and battery.

This level of conduct evidences a conscious disregard of or an indifference to the consequences of the act committed. a. Intentional. b. Reckless. c. Negligent. d. All of these are correct.

b. Reckless.

Which of the following is not required for the plaintiff to prove in an action for negligence? a. Breach of duty b. Superseding event c. Injury d. Cause

b. Superseding event

Sara is an FBI agent. She was looking at Facebook in her off duty hours. Sara saw a picture of one of her friends. She noticed a picture of one of her high school friends, Brett. She remembered being hurt by Brett when he failed to ask her out to a dance. Sara included Brett's name and photograph in a list of the FBI's top ten criminals. Brett has never been convicted of any crime and is horrified by the thought of being considered a criminal. Sara's action: a. is false light. b. could be either libel or false light. c. is slander. d. is libel.

b. could be either libel or false light.

To prove a case of negligence against a defendant the plaintiff must prove: a. negligence per se. b. duty of care, breach of duty, factual cause, and harm within the scope of liability. c. intentional infliction of injury. d. malice aforethought

b. duty of care, breach of duty, factual cause, and harm within the scope of liability.

The reasonable person standard is: a. external and subjective. b. external and objective. c. internal and subjective. d. internal and objective.

b. external and objective.

Rachel attends weekly major league baseball games with her boyfriend. One day, she gets hit in the head by a foul ball. If Rachel sues the baseball stadium for negligence related to the damages she sustained from the ball hitting her head, but the stadium prevails, what would be the stadium's winning defense? a. res ipsa loquitur b. implied assumption of the risk. c. no intent. d. none of these are correct.

b. implied assumption of the risk.

The unreasonable and highly offensive interference with the solitude of another is the tort of: a. nuisance. b. intrusion. c. appropriation. d. false light.

b. intrusion.

Sadie was shopping at the local discount store early in the morning on Black Friday (after Thanksgiving). Just as she tried to exit after completing her purchases, the door was locked due to a momentary power failure. She was quickly let out of the door by a nearby security guard. If Mary brings suit against them for false imprisonment, she will: a. win even if the inconvenience was brief because she was, in effect, being confined to the store. b. lose if the amount of time was very short. c. win because the store was at fault for detaining her. d. win because the law protects any false detention, no matter how short.

b. lose if the amount of time was very short.

The Hometown Gazette is the local paper in the town where Tim lives and attends college. One warm day, Sam decided to take a nap under a tree on campus. A photographer from the Hometown Gazette snapped a picture of Sam as he was sleeping under the tree on campus. They printed the picture on the front page of the paper. The caption under the picture was about the weather and did not mention Sam by name. The Hometown Gazette is liable for: a. intrusion. b. nothing. c. disparagement. d. appropriation.

b. nothing.

Helen is friends with Nuncio. Helen and Nuncio are in a general education class together at a local college. Nuncio did not call her to study for a test when he said he would. Helen sees Nuncio in class the next day, but he doesn't acknowledge her. Helen is so mad that she wrote a defamatory post on Nuncio's Facebook page. Five mutual friends "liked" Helen's post. Helen has committed: a. the opinion that Helen posted was a matter or absolute privilege. b. the tort of libel. c. the tort of slander. d. neither libel nor slander, because there has been no publication of the post.

b. the tort of libel.

In Love v. Hardee's Food Systems, Inc. the main issue in this case was: a. whether the owner or possessor of property is liable for hiring staff members who fail to keep the bathroom floors clean and dry at all times. b. whether the owner or possessor of property is liable to an invitee if the owner knew, or should have known of a dangerous condition and failed to take action to fix it, barricade people from it, or warn people of it and an invitee was injured due to the condition. c. whetherthe owner or possessor of property should keep the floors dry at all times. d. whether the restaurant has a duty of care to trespassers who slip and fall on the floor.

b. whether the owner or possessor of property is liable to an invitee if the owner knew, or should have known of a dangerous condition and failed to take action to fix it, barricade people from it, or warn people of it and an invitee was injured due to the condition.

In the matter of Frank B. Hall & Co., Inc. v. Buck, the court considered what issue? a. Did the Hall employees like Larry Buck as a fellow employee? b. Did the Hall employees make the statements against Buck with malice? c. Is communication of defamatory statements made to another without inducement sufficient to support "publication" as an essential element of the tort? d. Were the statements made by the Buck employees protected by the First Amendment?

c. Is communication of defamatory statements made to another without inducement sufficient to support "publication" as an essential element of the tort?

Jay intentionally pushed Bob into a fence negligently erected by Slade around Slade's swimming pool. The fence caved in and Bob nearly drowned. Who is liable? a. Slade because of his negligent conduct. b. Slade because Jay's conduct would be foreseeable. c. Jay because of his intentional intervening conduct. d. Slade and Jay because they both contributed to the harm.

c. Jay because of his intentional intervening conduct.

Nick is a crop-duster and sprayed pesticide on Ray's crops in a very careful manner on a windless day. Nevertheless, some of the pesticide spray fell on Ray's 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. Nick is not liable because he was not negligent in his spraying operation. b. Nick is not liable because the neighbor assumed the risk of damage to the feed by placing it so close to the fence. c. Nick is liable because spraying pesticides is an abnormally dangerous activity. d. Ray is not liable for the damage because of contributory negligence.

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

Bella was arrested for shoplifting at the age of 16 and convicted as an adult. She is now 32 years old and plans to marry Ed. Ed's sister found out about Bella's arrest and then told Ed's parents. Bella now wants to sue Ed's sister for public disclosure of private facts. Does Bella have a case against Ed's sister? a. Yes. b. No, because the statement is true. c. No, because arrests are a public and not a private fact, and because telling Ed's parents is not sufficient publicity. d. No, because telling Ed's parents is not sufficient publicity for public disclosure of private facts.

c. No, because arrests are a public and not a private fact, and because telling Ed's parents is not sufficient publicity.

"Factual cause" in negligence cases is also known as: a. The matter-of-fact test. b. The true-cause test. c. The but-for test. d. The foreseeability test.

c. The but-for test.

Which of the following is correct with respect to the reasonable person standard when there is an emergency? a. The court will not consider the fact that an emergency existed at the time. b. The court will assume that the defendant's own negligent conduct created the emergency. c. The court will take into consideration the fact that he was at the time confronted with a sudden and unexpected emergency. d. All of these are correct.

c. The court will take into consideration the fact that he was at the time confronted with a sudden and unexpected emergency.

Which of the following is a principal objective of tort law? a. To incapacitate individuals who are a risk of harm to others. b. To attach a penalty to the person for the tortious behavior. c. To compensate persons who sustain harm or loss resulting from another's conduct. d. To deter onlookers from committing tortious behavior in the future.

c. To compensate persons who sustain harm or loss resulting from another's conduct.

Melissa and Mary are next-door neighbors in a densely-populated residential neighborhood. One day, Melissa begins to drill on her property in search of oil and gas beneath the land's surface. During the process, Melissa's drilling emits unpleasant odors, dust, and loud noises from sunrise until sunset onto Mary's property. Since the drilling commenced, Mary has had trouble sleeping and developed a persistent, nagging cough. If Mary sues Melissa for the tort of nuisance, is Melissa liable? a. No, so long as Melissa obtained permitting from the appropriate authorities. b. No, Mary must learn to live with Melissa's drilling. c. Yes, because Melissa's drilling has significantly and unreasonably disturbed Mary's use and enjoyment of her land. d. No, Melissa is free to do with her land as she pleases.

c. Yes, because Melissa's drilling has significantly and unreasonably disturbed Mary's use and enjoyment of her land.

The tort of abuse of process can be filed: a. only when the plaintiff or prosecution loses the preceding litigation. b. only after a criminal action. c. after the plaintiff or prosecution used a legal proceeding (criminal or civil) to accomplish a purpose for which the proceeding was not designed. d. All of these are correct.

c. after the plaintiff or prosecution used a legal proceeding (criminal or civil) to accomplish a purpose for which the proceeding was not designed.

The intentional conduct by one person directed at another that places the other in apprehension of imminent bodily harm or offensive contact is the tort of: a. battery. b. intrusion. c. assault. d. intentional infliction of emotional distress.

c. assault.

The pure comparative negligence doctrine is applied by some states to: a. eliminate recovery for plaintiffs that failed to exercise reasonable care. b. encourage plaintiffs not to file suit if they made poor choices. c. divide the damages between the parties according to their fault. d. All of these are correct.

c. divide the damages between the parties according to their fault

Daniel has surgery on his stomach. A few weeks later, he has pain in his stomach. Doctors find a scalpel in his stom-ach. If Daniel wants to sue the surgeon for his injuries: a. he will lose, because it will be impossible for him to prove that the scalpel wasn't in his stomach before the surgery. b. he will lose, because the surgeon 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.

A photographer taking videos of a movie star with a cell phone would not be guilty of intrusion if the: a. photographer entered onto the movie star's property. b. movie star was in her dressing room at the time. c. movie star was having her star unveiled on the "Walk of Fame." d. videos were taken when the photographer entered the star's home through a gap in a privacy fence.

c. movie star was having her star unveiled on the "Walk of Fame."

Merchants who detain shoppers suspected of shoplifting are protected in most states by statutes as long as the merchant detains the suspect with all of the following, except: a. for no more than a reasonable amount of time. b. in a reasonable manner. c. on camera. d. with probable cause.

c. on camera.

If Nina, while riding a motorcycle, carelessly runs into Allen, a pedestrian who is crossing the street within the cross-walk, Nina is liable in negligence for: a. offensive contact if her motorcycle touches Allen's coat, even if there is no damage to the coat. b. offensive contact if her side mirror brushes against Allen, even if there are no physical injuries to him. c. physical injuries Allen sustains from the collision because Nina's negligent conduct proximately caused harm to a legally protected interest. d. All of these are correct.

c. physical injuries Allen sustains from the collision because Nina's negligent conduct proximately caused harm to a legally protected interest.

In Klein v. Pyrodyne Corporation, the main issue in this case was: a. whether Pyrodyne Corporation could foresee the injuries that occurred to the Kleins at the fireworks display. b. whether people who attend a fireworks display assume the risk of injury from stray fireworks. c. whether a company that sets off fireworks for a public display is subject to strict liability for injuries that happen as a result of the activity. d. whether Pyrodyne was negligent in their actions in setting up the fireworks display.

c. whether a company that sets off fireworks for a public display is subject to strict liability for injuries that happen as a result of the activity.

In Palumbo v. Nikirk, the main issue in this case was: a. whether postal carriers assume the risk of dangerous dogs when they deliver the mail door to door. b. whether the owners of a dog of a certain breed are liable for all actions of their dog. c. whether the owners of a dog were strictly liable when their dog bit a postal carrier if the owners were unaware that the dog would bite. d. whether the owners of a dog had a duty of care to the postal carrier at the house next door.

c. whether the owners of a dog were strictly liable when their dog bit a postal carrier if the owners were unaware that the dog would bite.

In Ryan v. Friesenhahn, the main issue in this case was: a. whether Sabrina Ryan's death was due to her contributory negligence. b. whether parents are liable for the actions of their children. c. whether the parents had a duty of care to children that attended a party at their home when alcoholic beverages were made available to underage drinkers, creating a case of negligence per se. d. whether the son of the house was liable for the damages owing to alcoholic beverages served to those who were under the legal age.

c. whether the parents had a duty of care to children that attended a party at their home when alcoholic beverages were made available to underage drinkers, creating a case of negligence per se.

In which of the following can absolute privilege protect the defendant regardless of his intent? a. Statements regarding a third party made between spouses when they are alone. b. Statements made by members of Congress on the floor of Congress and by members of state and local bodies. c. Statements made by participants in a judicial proceeding regarding that proceeding. d. All of these are correct.

d. All of these are correct.

Andy and his family are next door neighbors to Fred. There is a direct route across Fred's lawn to Andy's school. Andy's parents have obtained Fred's permission for Andy to walk across the lawn each day he walks to school. One day Andy brings his soccer team across Fred's yard, and they stop to play soccer on Fred's yard: a. Andy's friends are not liable of trespass to real property, because they were with Andy. b. Andy is liable of trespass to real property, because he walked across Fred's yard. c. Andy is not liable of trespass to real property, because he had Fred's permission to cross the yard. d. Andy and his friends are liable of trespass to real property, because they played soccer in Fred's yard.

d. Andy and his friends are liable of trespass to real property, because they played soccer in Fred's yard.

With respect to the tort of trespass to personal property, liability is limited to which of the follow instances? a. The trespasser dispossesses the other of the personal property. b. The trespasser substantially impairs the condition, quality, or value of the property. c. The trespasser deprives the possessor of the use of the property for a substantial time. d. Any of these are correct.

d. Any of these are correct.

What issue did the court consider in White v. Samsung Electronics? a. Did Samsung cast a bad light on Vanna White through the publicity of its campaign with her likeness? b. Should Samsung have paid Vanna White money after the fact of using her identity without her permission? c. Was Vanna White a celebrity with the right of protection of her identity? d. Did Samsung exploit the value of Vanna White's identity without her consent?

d. Did Samsung exploit the value of Vanna White's identity without her consent?

In the matter of Texaco, Inc. v. Pennzoil, Co.,what issue did the court consider? a. Did Texaco disparage Pennzoil to Getty in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the statements? b. Did Texaco institute wrongful civil proceedings in an effort to get Getty to transfer his interest in the Pennzoil stock? c. Did Texaco exercise intentional dominion over the control of Getty's Pennzoil stock without their knowledge? d. Did Texaco actively persuade Getty and the Getty Museum to sell their shares of Getty Oil after had entered into a contract for sale to Pennzoil?

d. Did Texaco actively persuade Getty and the Getty Museum to sell their shares of Getty Oil after had entered into a contract for sale to Pennzoil?

Proximate Cause in negligence cases is also known as: a. The matter-of-fact test. b. The true-cause test. c. The but-for test. d. Foreseeability.

d. Foreseeability.

Which of the following is a special relationship giving rise to a duty to act to aid or protect one in peril? a. Hotel and guest b. Cousin to cousin c. School principal and student d. Hotel and guest, and school principal and student

d. Hotel and guest, and school principal and student

In the matter of Ferrell v. Mikula, the court considered the issue of whether: a. the manager was experienced enough to make the determination of probable cause. b. the restaurant violated the right to privacy that the Ferrells had in driving their car. c. the manager acted with malice against the Ferrells. d. the restaurant or the manager should have been granted a motion for summary judgment on the issue of false imprisonment of the Ferrells.

d. the restaurant or the manager should have been granted a motion for summary judgment on the issue of false imprisonment of the Ferrells.

What duty of care is owed by a possessor of land to adult trespassers? a. The possessor of land must take reasonable care to keep adult trespassers safe. b. The possessor of land is only responsible to keep himself safe. c. The duty of the possessor of the land extends only to those who are on the land. d. The possessor is not liable to adult trespassers for failure to maintain land in a reasonably safe condition

d. The possessor is not liable to adult trespassers for failure to maintain land in a reasonably safe condition

Dr. Otis performed non-emergency oral surgery on John's mouth to remove John's wisdom teeth. During the surgery, Dr. Otis negligently cut John's gums and caused severe bleeding in John's mouth. The cut to John's gums caused severe scarring and pain in John's mouth, and his wisdom teeth remained in place. If John sues Dr. Otis for negligence, what standard of care will be evaluated in analyzing Dr. Otis's negligence? a. Reasonable person standard. b. Average person standard. c. Subjective standard of care. d. The same standard of care as members of Dr. Otis's profession.

d. The same standard of care as members of Dr. Otis's profession.

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur would permit the court to infer negligence in which of the following situations? a. A chair broke when a customer sat down on it, but the customer wasn't injured. b. A chandelier fell on a patron's head in the restaurant dining room. c. A golfer on a golf course was hit in the head with a stray shot golfball. d. The situations with a chandelier falling and the golfer are both correct

d. The situations with a chandelier falling and the golfer are both correct

Javier is 20 years old and has a slight mental disability that prevents him from learning at the same pace as others. On his way home from college class, Javier accidentally ran a red light and crashed into Katie's car, causing Katie's car to be inoperable. If Katie sues Javier for negligence, can Javier be held liable? a. No, because defendants with mental disabilities cannot be sued for negligence. b. No, because Javier's mental disability caused a delayed reaction time to the red light. c. Yes, because Javier intentionally crashed into Katie. d. Yes, because Javier's mental disability is not considered in determining whether Javier was negligent, and Javier is not a child.

d. Yes, because Javier's mental disability is not considered in determining whether Javier was negligent, and Javier is not a child.

Intent as used in the law of intentional torts requires an infant to be liable for their intentional torts, if: a. the infant's age is such that he can form the required intent. b. the infant's knowledge is such that he can form the required intent. c. the infant is at least sixteen years old. d. both the infant's age and knowledge are such that he can form the required intent.

d. both the infant's age and knowledge are such that he can form the required intent.

Andy wrote a defamatory statement regarding Sam which he did not show to anyone but which he posted on the campus public access television channel (where he worked as a workstudy). Andy has committed: a. the tort of false light. b. the tort of slander c. neither libel nor slander, because there has been no publication of the statement. d. the tort of libel.

d. the tort of libel.