Deck 7: Negligence and Strict Liability

Question 1

In theory, causation in fact is limitless.

Answer 1

True

Question 2

An assumption of risk defense does not require that a risk be voluntarily assumed.

Answer 2

False

Question 3

A reasonable person standard determines whether a person could have avoided suffering harm from another's allegedly negligent act.

Answer 3

False

Question 4

A person assumes all risks associated with any activity in which he or she participates.

Question 5

Business owners have no duty to exercise reasonable care to protect invitees.

Question 6

If a person breaches a duty of care and another person suffers an injury, the breach must have caused the harm for liability to result.

Question 7

For purposes of establishing negligence, causation in fact exists if an in?jury would have occurred even without the defendant's act.

Question 8

Under the theory of negligence, harm must be foreseeable to be considered the proximate cause of an injury.

Question 9

Liability for negligence requires a finding of causation in fact and a de?termination of proximate cause.

Question 10

If one person's act harms another, there is no liability unless the actor intended the harm.

Question 11

To determine whether a duty of care has been breached, a judge asks how he or she would have acted in the same circumstances.

Question 12

Proximate cause exists when the connection between an act and an in?jury is strong enough to justify imposing liability.

Question 13

The degree of care to be exercised in a situation can vary with a person's profession or occupation.

Question 14

To avoid liability for negligence, a business owner must protect its pa?trons against all risks.

Question 15

No one is expected to exercise a reasonable standard of care in every activity.

Question 16

If one person's act harms another, there is may be liability for negligence even if the actor did not intend the harm.

Question 17

If no harm results from an allegedly negligent act, there is no liability.

Question 18

An ordinary person standard determines whether allegedly negligent conduct resulted in a breach of a duty of care.

Question 19

Under the theory of negligence, the duty of care requires one person to come to the aid of another in "peril."

Question 20

Under the theory of negligence, the duty of care requires one person to aid another who has suffered harm from someone's negligence.

Question 21

Negligence per se may occur on the violation of a statute.

Question 22

In a comparative negligence state, if a plaintiff is found to be 30 percent negligent, the award against the defendant will be reduced by 70 percent.

Question 23

Under the doctrine of comparative negligence, both the plaintiff's and the defendant's negligence are taken into consideration.

Question 24

Only a foreseeable intervening event can break the connection between a wrongful act and an injury to another.

Question 25

Under a dram shop act or a social host statute, liability can be imposed without proof of negligence.

Question 26

The extreme risk of an activity is a primary basis for imposing strict liability.

Question 27

One characteristic of an abnormally dangerous activity is that it involves a low degree of risk.

Question 28

In many states, the plaintiff's negligence is a defense that may be raised in a negligence suit.

Question 29

One of the requirements for a suit based on strict liability is a failure to exercise due care.

Question 30

Strict liability is imposed for reasons other than fault.

Question 31

One characteristic of an abnormally dangerous activity is that it is not commonly performed in a certain area.

Question 32

The basis for applying strict liability is an intentional wrongful act.

Question 33

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applies if an event causing harm does not normally occur in the absence of negligence.

Question 34

A person assumes any risk that is different from or greater than the risk normally carried by an activity.

Question 35

Assumption of risk can be raised as a defense in a negligence suit.

Question 36

A person who keeps a wild animal is always strictly liable for any harm that the animal inflicts.

Question 37

Self-defense is a defense available in an action based on a negligence theory.

Question 38

Under the doctrine of strict liability, liability is strictly based on the "obvious" fault of the defendant.

Question 39

A superseding cause is an intervening event that imposes liability on a defendant for injuries caused by the intervening event.

Question 40

A person who keeps a domestic animal is always strictly liable for any harm that the animal inflicts.

Question 41

Dirk is driving a sport utility vehicle in which Elin is a passenger when they are involved in a traffic accident, and Elin is injured. Liability may be imposed on Dirk for Elin's injury if Dirk's driving is

A) neither the causation in fact nor the proximate cause of the injury.
B) only the causation in fact of the injury.
C) only the proximate cause of the injury.
D) the causation in fact and the proximate cause of the injury.

Question 42

To protect its customers and other business invitees, Sav-Mart Grocery Stores Corporation must warn them of

A) all dangers.
B) concealed dangers.
C) open dangers.
D) no dangers.

Question 43

While boating, Phil ignores warning signs that the weather is worsening. His boat is swamped. Quick Sea Rescue's recovery of Phil is slowed by an inexperienced crewman. Meanwhile Rita, who is also in a floundering craft awaiting rescue, is lost. In Rita's family's suit against Phil, his failure to heed the signs of the approaching storm will most likely be held

A) not the cause of Rita's loss.
B) the causation in fact, but not the proximate cause of Rita's loss.
C) the proximate cause of Rita's loss.
D) the superceding cause of Rita's loss.

Question 44

Kay carelessly bumps into Lyle, knocking him to the ground. Kay has committed the tort of negligence

A) only if Lyle is injured.
B) only if Lyle is not injured.
C) under any circumstances.
D) under no circumstances.

Question 45

Marie, a driver for National Transport Company, causes a five-car acci?dent on an interstate highway. Marie and National are liable to

A) all those who are injured.
B) only those whose injuries could reasonably have been foreseen.
C) only those whose cars were immediately ahead and behind Marie's vehicle.
D) only those who do not have insurance.

Question 46

Pam files a successful suit against Quantity Stores based on Quantity's neg?ligence. Normally, an award in such a suit consists of

A) comparative damages.
B) compensatory damages.
C) contributory damages.
D) punitive damages.

Question 47

John sees that Kris is about to step into the path of an oncoming bus. If John does not warn Kris of the danger, John is liable

A) only if Kris is injured.
B) only if Kris is not injured.
C) regardless of the consequences to Kris.
D) under no circumstances.

Question 48

Lana hires Mike, an architect, to design a warehouse. Lana is dissatis?fied with the look of the new building and sues Mike, alleging negligence. Mike can successfully defend against the suit by proving that

A) he is not familiar with every principle of art.
B) his design is as attractive as an ordinary person's.
C) Lana could not have designed a more attractive building.
D) Lana was not injured in any way.

Question 49

Leon files a suit against Moira, a medical doctor, alleging negligence. As a physician, Moira is held to the standard of

A) a blameless individual. b a faultless ordinary person.
C) a reliable professional.
D) a reasonable physician.

Question 50

Caleb is driving a car in which Dona is a passenger when an accident occurs. Caleb and Dona are emotionally rattled, but neither is physically hurt. Caleb is not liable to Dona on a negligence theory because

A) both parties were emotionally rattled.
B) Caleb did not apparently intend to cause an accident.
C) Dona must have been comparatively negligent.
D) Dona was not injured.

Question 51

Molly shoots Norm with Opal's pistol. The proximate cause of Norm be?ing shot is most likely attributable to

A) Molly and Opal.
B) Molly only.
C) Opal only.
D) neither Molly nor Opal.

Question 52

Nick sees Opal, a stranger, in peril, but does not attempt to rescue her. Opal could successfully sue Nick for

A) negligence per se. b nothing.
C) a violation of the "danger invites" rescue doctrine.
D) a violation of a Good Samaritan statute.

Question 53

Fact Pattern 7-A1
Roy owns a building in which Shelly rents an apartment. The sidewalks around the building are in poor repair. Many sections have buckled from the growth of tree roots over the years.
Refer to Fact Pattern 7-A1. As the owner of the building, Roy has a duty to

A) arrange to escort anyone who walks onto the property.
B) do nothing.
C) repair the sidewalks.
D) repair the sidewalks only if he is notified that it is a problem.

Question 54

Fact Pattern 7-A1
Roy owns a building in which Shelly rents an apartment. The sidewalks around the building are in poor repair. Many sections have buckled from the growth of tree roots over the years.
Refer to Fact Pattern 7-A1. As a tenant in the building, Shelly has a duty to

A) arrange to escort anyone who walks onto the property.
B) do nothing.
C) repair the sidewalks.
D) repair the sidewalks only if she is notified that it is a problem.

Question 55

Ira shops in a Jolly Mart store. Enticed by a display, Ira takes an item to examine it and, when he is done, places it on the floor. Kris, a consumer enticed by the same display, does not see the item on the floor, trips over it, falls, and suffers an injury. With respect to the danger, Jolly had

A) actual notice.
B) constructive notice.
C) mishandled notice.
D) no notice.

Question 56

Kelly is injured when she slips and falls on Lee's sidewalk. To determine whether Lee owed a duty of care to Kelly, Lee is subject to the standard of

A) a realistic person.
B) a reasonable person.
C) a recognizable person.
D) a reliable person.

Question 57

Sam, an engineer, supervises the construction of a new bridge. When the bridge col?lapses due to faulty construction, Sam is sued by those injured in the collapse. As a professional, Sam is held to the same standard of care as

A) ordinary persons.
B) other engineers.
C) other professionals, including doctors, dentists, and lawyers.
D) those injured in the collapse of the bridge.

Question 58

Bette backs out of City Parking Garage, colliding with Dill's car. Dill may recover $7,500 to cover the cost of the repairs if Bette failed to act as

A) a blameless person. b a faultless person.
C) a reliable person.
D) a reasonable person.

Question 59

Dependable Appliances, a retail store, must use reasonable care on its premises to warn its patrons of

A) all risks.
B) hidden risks.
C) obvious risks.
D) no risks.

Question 60

Reaching for a bottle of soda from a display in a Big Bargains store, Cody slips in a puddle of spilled soda and falls, suffering an injury. Big's employees are not aware of the spilled soda until Cody falls. In a suit against Big, Cody will most likely

A) lose, because Big's employees were not aware of the spill.
B) lose, because Cody should have exercised more care.
C) win, because Big can in turn recover from the soda bottler.
D) win, because the spilled soda was foreseeable.

Question 61

Eva owns Fast-Rate Salvage, a demolition company. A demolition by a Fast-Rate crew injures Glen, a passerby. Under the theory of strict li?abil?ity, Eva must pay for Glen's injury

A) only if Glen's injury was not reasonably foreseeable. b only if Glen's injury was reasonably foreseeable.
C) only if the Fast-Rate crew was at fault.
D) whether or not the Fast-Rate crew was at fault.

Question 62

Edie is injured when she is struck by debris from an explosion at Finest Fireworks Factory. The rule that harm must be foreseeable to constitute the proximate cause of an injury under a negligence theory was established in

A) Edie v. Finest Fireworks Factory.
B) Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.
C) Rylands v. Fletcher.
D) Congress.

Question 63

Leo slips and falls in Mornin' Breakfast Café and is injured. Leo files a suit against Mornin' for $50,000. If Leo is 20 percent at fault and Mornin' is 80 percent, under a contributory negligence doctrine, Leo would recover

A) $0.
B) $25,000.
C) $40,000.
D) $50,000.

Question 64

In an emergency situation, Lori renders aid to Mike, who needs help. Mike would most likely be prohibited from suing Lori for negligence under

A) any circumstances.
B) a Good Samaritan statute.
C) a social host statute.
D) no circumstances.

Question 65

Driving his sport utility vehicle negligently, Bart crashes into a streetlight. The streetlight falls, smashing through the roof of a house, killing Chris. But for Bart's negligence, Chris would not have died. Regarding the death, the crash is the

A) cause in fact. b intervening cause.
C) proximate cause.
D) superseding cause.

Question 66

Drake pushes Evon into the path of an oncoming car driven by Flip. Gina tries to rescue Evon, but the car hits both of them. Drake is liable for the injuries of

A) Evon and Gina.
B) Evon only.
C) Gina only.
D) neither Evon nor Gina.

Question 67

An Iowa state statute requires amusement parks to maintain equipment in specific condition for the protection of patrons. Jack's Fun Park fails to maintain its equipment. Key, a patron, is injured. Jack's has committed

A) a dram shop act.
B) contributory negligence.
C) negligence per se.
D) res ipsa loquitur.

Question 68

George has a badly infected right foot. Herb, George's physician, prescribes amputation. George agrees. During the operation, Herb amputates the left foot. In George's suit against Herb, George's best theory for recovery is

A) assumption of risk.
B) negligence per se.
C) res ipsa loquitur.
D) strict liability.

Question 69

Liu enters Mountain Triathlon, an athletic competition in which Liu has never competed. Regarding the risk of injury, Liu assumes the risks

A) attributable to the Triathlon in any way.
B) different from the risks normally associated with the Triathlon.
C) greater than the risks normally associated with the Triathlon.
D) normally associated with the Triathlon.

Question 70

Clyde enters Desert Decathlon, an athletic competition in which Clyde has often competed. Regarding the risk of injury, Clyde assumes the risks

A) attributable to the Decathlon in any way.
B) different from the risks normally associated with the Decathlon.
C) greater than the risks normally associated with the Decathlon.
D) normally associated with the Decathlon.

Question 71

Frank slips and falls on Gail's Harbor Tour Boat and is injured. Frank files a suit against Gail's for $500,000. If Frank is 20 percent at fault and Gail's is 80 percent, under the "50 percent rule" comparative neg?ligence principles, Frank would recover

A) $0.
B) $25,000.
C) $40,000.
D) $50,000.

Question 72

Super Tool Company makes tools for consumers and construction professionals. While using a Super tool to replace an electrical outlet, Tom neglects to shut off the power and is electrocuted. Against a suit filed by Tom's heirs, Super's best defense is

A) assumption of risk.
B) contributory negligence.
C) negligence per se.
D) superseding cause.

Question 73

Nico is a passenger in a car driven by Owen, whose negligence causes an accident, injuring himself. Nico, uninjured, accompanies Owen to Parkside Hospital in an ambulance. The ambulance is hit by a car driven by Quin, injuring Nico. Nico files a suit against Owen, whose best defense is

A) assumption of risk.
B) contributory negligence.
C) negligence per se.
D) superseding cause.

Question 74

Gina slips and falls in Homestyle Shopping Center and is injured. Gina files a suit against Homestyle for $500,000. Under a "pure" comparative negligence rule, Gina could recover damages from Homestyle

A) only if both parties were equally at fault.
B) only if Gina was less at fault.
C) only if Gina was more at fault.
D) under any circumstances.

Question 75

A state statute requires machinery in industrial plants to include automatic shut-off switches accessible to each employee working on the machine. Steel Company's (SC's) equipment does not have the switches. Trudy, an SC employee, suffers an injury that an accessible shut-off switch would have prevented. Trudy's best theory for recovery against SC is

A) assumption of risk.
B) negligence per se.
C) res ipsa loquitur.
D) strict liability.

Question 76

Valuable Resources, Inc., uses dynamite in its remote mining operations. Will stores household cleaners in his suburban garage. Most likely liable under the doctrine of strict liability for any injury caused by an abnormally dangerous activ?ity is
a. neither Valuable Resources nor Will.
b. Valuable Resources and Will.
c. Valuable Resources only.
d. Will only.

Question 77

Ralph, a van driver for Standard Delivery Company, causes a multi-vehicle accident on a city street. Ralph and Standard are liable to

A) all those who were injured.
B) only those who were uninsured.
C) only those whose injuries could have been reasonably foreseen.
D) only those whose vehicles were closest to Rod's van.

Question 78

Beth is injured in a car accident and sues Cal, alleging negligence. Cal claims that Beth was driving more carelessly than he was. Comparative negligence may reduce Beth's recovery

A) even if Beth was only slightly at fault.
B) only if Beth was as equally at fault as Cal.
C) only if Beth was less at fault than Cal.
D) only if Beth was more at fault than Cal.

Question 79

Lyn is injured when she is struck by debris floating on her property flooded by a breach of Mining Company's reservoir. The rule that a person who engages in certain activities may be liable under the doctrine of strict liability for any harm that results was established in

A) Lyn v. Mining Co.
B) Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. c Rylands v. Fletcher.
D) Congress.

Question 80

Earth Movers, Inc., uses dynamite to prepare land for highway pro?jects. Strict liability is imposed on this activity because

A) Earth is a corporation.
B) the activity is inherently negligent.
C) the activity is of a dangerous nature.
D) the government pays for highway construction.