Multiple Choice
[Blow Up] Devin has several full gas cans in the bed of her pick-up truck,because she runs a landscaping company and needs the gas for her mowers.On the way home from the gas station,Devin stops at her bank and exits her truck.Teresa pulls behind her and negligently rear-ends Devin's pick-up.The truck explodes and results in the bank building burning to the ground.The bank sues Teresa for negligence claiming that Teresa should have to pay for the entire bank building.The bank claims that it should be able to recover under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine.
-Does actual cause exist in the bank's action against Teresa?
A) Actual cause is present because Teresa was the legal cause of the bank burning.
B) Actual cause is not present because Teresa is not the proximate cause of the bank burning.
C) Actual cause is present because as a matter of policy,it is believed that someone who rear-ends a vehicle should be responsible for damages.
D) Actual causation would exist because the bank would not have been burnt down if Teresa had fulfilled her duty to drive properly.
E) Actual cause is not present because Teresa is not the legal cause of the bank burning.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q19: Assumption of the risk is a doctrine
Q37: Why has the contributory negligence defense been
Q38: What is the final required element of
Q41: Which of the following is sometimes referred
Q43: Which of the following was the result
Q44: What is the literal meaning of "negligence
Q45: Res ipsa loquitor allows a judge or
Q46: Which of the following are laws holding
Q47: Which of the following is an unforeseeable
Q53: What does "res ipsa loquitur" mean? What