Law-Ch6

Ace your homework & exams now with Quizwiz!

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

a. assault

The law of torts reflects: a. community standards b. social values c. the current business environment d. traditional standards e. all of the other choices

e. all of the other choices

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

a. specifically raised by the defendant

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

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

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

b. substantial factor

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

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

Defenses to intentional torts are: a. useless to defendants in negligence torts b. not available to defendants in negligence torts c. the only defenses available to defendants in negligence torts d. rarely available to defendants in negligence torts e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

Intentional conduct that places a person in fear of immediate bodily harm or offensive contact is the tort of: a. battery b. false imprisonment c. defamation d. duress e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

Intentional physical contact without consent may constitute the tort of: a. negligence b. misrepresentation c. defamation d. duress e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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

d. the international perspective on liability

e. comparative advantage

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. ordinary care or due care

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

a. the victim is the plaintiff

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. determinative cause d. foreseeable cause e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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

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

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

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

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

a. a reasonably skilled, competent and experienced doctor

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

a. Geczi expressly assumed the risk of 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

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

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

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

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

a. acted voluntarily

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

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

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. assumption of the risk

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

a. battery

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

a. comparative negligence

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

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

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. indisputable c. unavoidable d. all of the specific choices e. none of the specific choices

a. foreseeable

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. harm from others' unintentional but legally careless conduct

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

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

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

a. legal

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

a. personal injury tort suits are not allowed

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

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

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

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

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

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

In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty 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

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

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. a proximate defense e. a substantial defense

b. a valid defense

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

b. assault

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

b. battery

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

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 choices

b. foreseeable

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

b. it creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others

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

b. legally distinct from

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

b. negligence

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

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

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

b. provide compensation for injured parties by wrongdoers

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 care expected of a skilled surgeon under the circumstances

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. the consequence of the wrongdoing of another

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 party be detained against his or her will d. the defendant intended to injure the plaintiff e. all of the other choices

b. the injured party have knowledge of the danger

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

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

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

b. the negligent conduct will not result in liability

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

b. unexpected instances of carelessness or bad behavior

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

In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty 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

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

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

c. superseding cause

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

c. also available to defendants in negligence torts

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

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

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

c. assumption of the risk and comparative negligence

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

c. but for rule

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

c. but not rule

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

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. comparative negligence

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

c. concern the interference with personal or property rights

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

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

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

c. expressly assumed the risk

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

c. insurance policy against being sued for negligence

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

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

Juries in tort cases often award large sums of money because: a. all tort cases involve serious injury so compensation is always large b. people 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. juries place a high value on the enforcement of legal rights

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

c. substantial factor test

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

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

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

c. the wrongdoer's actions were motivated by malice

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. their conduct was not that of a reasonable person

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

c. there is no fear of harm

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, 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 dropped d. the railroad employees acted in an unreasonable manner e. none of the other choices

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

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

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

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

c. willful misconduct

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

d. a civil wrong not a breach of contract

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

d. affirmative

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

d. all of the other 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

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

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

d. all of the other specific 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

d. all of the specific answer 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. all of the specific choices

In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty 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. all of the specific 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

d. all of the specific other choices

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

d. choices a and b

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

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

d. engaged in a voluntary action

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

d. negligence

In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product packaging, the company that bought 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

d. negligent misrepresentation

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

d. proximate cause or substantial factor

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

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

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

d. substantial factor

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

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

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

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

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

d. the reasonable person meets

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

d. the thing speaks for itself

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

d. the wrongdoer knew who would suffer the injury

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 that the package would cause damage e. there were the required number of railroad employees present

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

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

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

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

Most tort suits arise from: a. customer ignorance b. failure to plan for unexpected catastrophes c. natural disasters d. repeated failure to comply with industry regulations e. none of the other choices

e. none 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

e. all of the other choices

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

e. all of the other choices are necessary elements

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. all the other choices

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

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

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

A major purpose of tort law is to: a. replace the insurance industry b. impose criminal penalties on the negligent c. adequately regulate government contracting d. ensure the effective operation of the Due Process Clause e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 breach of contract e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

Assumption of risk is a ____ defense. a. proactive b. positive c. conciliatory d. redundant e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. unforeseen cause rule c. considerable factor test d. ultimate cause rule e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 substantial defense c. a proximate cause d. a proximate defense e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. continuous c. explainable d. indisputable e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. comparative negligence e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 defendant'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

e. none of the other choices

If a person intends to act to cause a harmful or offensive contact, he is liable for the tort of: a. assault b. false imprisonment c. defamation d. duress e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 working out is known to be dangerous e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. an average college graduate b. a recent graduate from medical school c. a high school biology teacher d. an average American e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

Intentional torts are based on: a. negligence b. carelessness c. obsequiousness d. assumption of care e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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

e. none of the other choices

Juries in tort cases often award large sums of money because: a. all tort cases involve serious injury so compensation is always large b. people on juries consistently dislike business c. juries lack understanding of how much damages are worth d. large damages payments will make businesses less likely to repeat their mistakes e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

Ordinary care or due care is a standard of care that the law presumes: a. the expert person meets b. the standard person meets c. the business owner meets d. the average person meets e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 arise from interaction with railroads e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 any ordinary person under the circumstances c. proximate cause is established res ipsa loquitur d. none of the other choices; surgeons are exempt from liability e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. proximate factor c. sine qua non d. proximate cause e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

The fear of immediate bodily harm that occurs for there to be an assault is fear: a. 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 b. that the plaintiff alleges to have suffered, regardless of the circumstances c. that any "sensitive person" would have suffered under similar circumstances d. that the judge instructs the jury has occurred or not, under the circumstances e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

The intentional tort of assault requires that: a. there be physical contact with the body b. the injured party suffer a "noticeable" physical injury c. the injured party be detained against his or her will d. the defendant intended to injure the plaintiff e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

The proximate cause of an injury is the ____ cause of the injury. a. only b. definite c. probable d. most likely e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 reveals the truth e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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

e. none of the other choices

To be liable for a tort the defendant must have: a. thought through the consequences of his action b. "carefully considered" the consequences of his actions c. been unaware of the consequences of his actions d. must have prevented intervening conduct e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

To be liable for an intentional tort, the defendant must have: a. acted as a reasonable person would under the same circumstances b. acted unknowingly c. acted quickly d. acted in an informed manner as to the consequences e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 beats you up in a fist fight c. someone points a gun at you while you are sleeping d. someone wiretaps your phone e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. fraud b. negligence c. false imprisonment d. malicious prosecution e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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. tort cases occur in New Zealand, but result in much lower compensation payments d. New Zealanders do not bring tort cases because of their history as a British colony e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choices

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 of treadmill use b. definitely assumed the risk of treadmill use by ignoring warnings of possible dangers c. assumed the risk by her "wanton and careless" behavior d. refused to assume the risk, which thereby voided her membership in Lifetime e. none of the other choices are correct

e. none of the other choices are correct

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 that caused the accident, so there was no liability e. none of the other choices are correct

e. none of the other choices are correct

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. contributory factor e. none of the other choices are correct

e. none of the other choices are correct

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 that results in bodily injury, whether intended or not 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

e. none of the other choices are correct

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 that could evaluate the product d. could proceed because the defendant intended to extract a large payment from the plaintiff based on false information e. none of the other choices

e. none of the other choicese. none of the other choices

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. they were not present at the time of the injury d. they admit to not liking the victim e. none of the other specific choices