Deck 11: Negligence: Element I: Duty

Question 1

Since Good Samaritans are not paid for the help they provide, they can never be sued for negligence.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

The duty of reasonable care requires the defendant to prevent all harm to the plaintiff.

Answer 2

False

Question 3

Without a special relationship, the existence of a duty depends on affirmative conduct.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

Nonfeasance can never be the basis of negligence liability.

Question 5

Those who engage in gratuitous undertakings do not have a duty to exercise reasonable care.

Question 6

The Ace Pesticide Company (APC) is hired by Irene to spray chemicals on her farm. On the day of the spraying it was unexpectedly windy. Some of the pesticide fell on George's crops. George's farm is adjacent to Irene's. George sues APC for negligence.

A) APC did not owe a duty to George because APC was not hired by George.
B) APC owed a duty to George because its affirmative conduct put George's crops at risk.
C) APC owed a duty to George if the spraying was illegal.
D) APC did not owe a duty to George because the damage to George's crops was caused by an act of God, the unexpected wind.

Question 8

An unforeseeable plaintiff is someone who was not in the zone of danger.

Question 10

Vince falls down the stairs in his home. Luckily, he has his cell phone in his pocket. While immobilized on the floor, he calls a neighbor to ask the neighbor to call an ambulance. The neighbor says, "I'll take care of it." The neighbor gets distracted and forgets to call the ambulance. Vince sues the neighbor for negligence.

A) The neighbor did not have a duty to help Vince because the neighbor's promise to call the ambulance was gratuitous.
B) The neighbor had a duty to help Vince even though the promise to call the ambulance was gratuitous.
C) The neighbor had a duty to help Vince because of the special relationship that exists between neighbors.
D) The neighbor did not have a duty to help Vince because there was no affirmative conduct by the neighbor that endangered Vince.

Question 13

Rich is a doctor. One day while strolling in the park he sees Adam, a stranger, choking on an apple. Rich does nothing to help Adam. Adam sues Rich for negligently failing to help him.

A) Rich had a duty to help Adam, because as a doctor it would have been easy for Rich to do so.
B) Rich did not have a duty to help Adam, because of the emergency that Adam faced.
C) Rich had a duty to help Adam because of the Tarasoff decision on doctors.
D) Rich did not have a duty to help Adam because there was no special relationship between Rich and Adam.

Question 15

Under the Andrews test, the plaintiff is not owed a duty unless he or she was in the zone of danger.

Question 16

The Andrews test is broader than the Cardozo test.

Question 17

Palsgraf is a famous case that helped define the meaning of breach of duty in negligence cases.

Question 19

In the law of negligence, what is the general rule on duty?

Question 21

When does a duty arise in nonfeasance cases?

Question 23

Define duty in the broadest sense.

Question 26

What is the difference between the zone-of-danger test of the majority opinion in Palsgraf and the world-at-large test of the dissenting opinion in Palsgraf ?

Question 27

When can a gratuitous promise lead to the imposition of a duty?

Question 29

List seven categories of special relationships.