Deck 8: Negligence, Strict Liability, and Product Liability

Question 1

In a strict liability case, the courts still consider if the defendant acted in a reasonable and prudent manner.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

In strict liability, if a company sells a beverage in a can that has sharp edges and injures several consumers, it will be held liable even if it didn't know about the problem.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

Most states recognize some form of comparative negligence.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

For the defendant to be liable in a negligence case, it must be proven that the defendant's conduct actually caused the injury. This is referred to as

A)factual cause.
B)duty of due care.
C)proximate cause.
D)breach.

Question 5

Evaluate the following scenarios and determine which represents Micha's highest liability?

A)Rose is lost and pulls her car into Micha's driveway for a moment to get her bearings.
B)Oscar is a twelve-year-old neighbor of Micha's who has snuck into Micha's backyard to swim in his pool.
C)Juanita is a customer having a latte in the coffee shop Micha owns and operates.
D)Ron is Micha's friend whom Micha has invited to his home to watch the Super Bowl.

Question 6

Negligence concerns harm that

A)is unforeseeable.
B)arises intentionally.
C)arises by accident.
D)is always substantial.

Question 7

The doctrine of contributory negligence is followed in most states.

Question 8

Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad  addressed the issue of furnishing alcohol to minors.

Question 9

The duty of care that each of us must follow is to behave as a reasonable person.

Question 10

Res ipsa loquitur shifts the burden of proof from the plaintiff to the defendant.

Question 11

Silas asks his friend Shelby to come to his property to go fishing at his pond. If he fails to warn her that the pier has a rotten spot and she falls through and is injured, Silas would be held liable in most states.

Question 12

In a negligence case, the plaintiff must establish

A)duty, strict liability, causation, and injury.
B)mens rea , breach, foreseeable harm, and injury.
C)duty, actus reus , foreseeable harm, and causation.
D)duty of due care, breach, factual cause, proximate cause, and damages.

Question 13

A defendant set off fireworks at a fully licensed Fourth of July show. The result of the activity caused harm to the plaintiff. In order for the plaintiff to win a case of negligence, he or she need only prove that it was foreseeable that the defendant's conduct might cause harm.

Question 14

A defendant engaging in an ultrahazardous activity is almost always liable for any harm that results.

Question 15

A landowner's highest duty is owed to licensees.

Question 16

Annette drove through an intersection without looking and hit Vincent's car that he had driven into the intersection without obeying a stop sign. Annette sued Vincent. The jury found that Annette's fault contributed 20 percent to the collision and determined that her total loss was $100,000. Under comparative negligence, the jury should award Annette

A)$20,000.
B)$80,000.
C)$100,000.
D)nothing.

Question 17

Tort issues are firmly ingrained in law and do not change.

Question 18

Kenneth was exposed to radiation on his job in an environmental cleanup. In a lawsuit against his employer, the court must decide the full extent of both present and future damages rather than allowing Kenneth to return to court years later if medical problems develop at that time.

Question 19

While hunting, Roger enters Adele's property without permission and is injured by falling into a ditch that was obscured by the underbrush. Under the common law, Adele is liable for Roger's injuries.

Question 20

A sports fan, injured by a hockey puck that flew into the stands during an NHL game, would be subject to the defense of assumption of the risk in a suit to recover for her injuries.

Question 21

List and discuss the elements necessary to establish negligence.

Question 22

If the defendant successfully proves __________, no matter how slight the plaintiff's negligence, the plaintiff will be denied any recovery of damages.

A)contributory negligence
B)comparative negligence
C)res ipsa loquitur
D)negligence per se

Question 23

Don was driving his truck when a board fell out of the truck bed and onto the road. Alice, who was driving closely behind Don's truck, tried to avoid the board, swerved, and struck a telephone pole, causing her severe injuries. Which of the following is correct?

A)Don is strictly liable to Alice for her injuries.
B)In a comparative negligence state, the actions of Don and Alice will be weighed to determine liability.
C)Don was not negligent in allowing the board to fall out of his truck.
D)Don is engaging in ultrahazardous activity.

Question 24

Wayne worked in an office. He had no criminal record, had never had a complaint made against him about his work or his conduct, and had been a faithful employee for nearly 20 years. One day, Wayne followed his supervisor to his home and fatally shot him. The estate of the supervisor sued the company, claiming it should have been aware of Wayne's growing frustration with work. The company's best defense will be that

A)there was no way to foresee that the incident would happen.
B)the incident occurred away from the office.
C)the killing was the result of a personal conflict between Wayne and the supervisor.
D)even if the company had been aware of Wayne's difficulty with his supervisor, Wayne did not have any criminal history.

Question 25

As it applies to landowners, which of the following statements regarding liability to a licensee is correct?

A)Whether the landowner is responsible for injury depends on whether the licensee is an adult or a child.
B)The landowner is liable to a licensee for injuries caused by hidden dangers only.
C)Since the licensee is a trespasser on the landowner's property, the landowner is not responsible for injury.
D)Since a licensee has permission to be on the landowner's property, the landowner is responsible for all injury whether hidden or obvious.

Question 26

Discuss the concepts of contributory negligence and comparative negligence.

Question 27

A plaintiff sues in negligence but has no direct proof that the defendant behaved unreasonably. Which of the following is most likely to help the plaintiff?

A)Res judicata
B)Stare decisis
C)Res ipsa loquitur
D)Mens rea

Question 28

Kyle was eating clam chowder soup in a restaurant when a very small piece of bone lodged in his throat. Fortunately, he was able to remove the bone with his fingers. However, he was upset by the incident and sued the restaurant for negligence. What is the most likely result in this case?

A)Kyle will not collect any damages since he did not sustain any damages.
B)Kyle will collect damages because the restaurant committed negligence per se.
C)Kyle will collect damages if he proves it was possible to prevent tiny fish bones from being present in clam chowder.
D)Kyle will collect damages, as res ipsa loquitur applies.

Question 29

Bob, a weak swimmer, ignored warning signs in a recreational swimming area and went into deep water. He soon grew tired and realized that he could not make it back to shore. Seeing Kelly, he cried out for help. Kelly, however, ignored the pleas. Bob was finally saved by Dorothy but suffered brain damage from being submerged during the ordeal. Bob now sues Kelly for negligence for failing to try to save him. Bob will

A)prevail because society places a duty on people to help each other and Kelly breached this duty, resulting in Bob's injury.
B)lose because Kelly had no legal duty to rescue him.
C)lose even though Kelly had a legal duty to save him, since Bob will not be able to prove that Kelly's failure to act was the proximate cause of his injuries.
D)lose because a reasonable person could not have foreseen that someone in a recreation area could not swim well.

Question 30

Kelley went ice skating on a neighbor's pond, but she fell through a thin area into icy waters. Kelley did not have permission to be on the property, and the neighbor did not even know that she was there. Is the neighbor liable for Kelley's injuries?

A)Yes. The neighbor should have posted "thin ice" notices.
B)No. Kelley was a trespasser, and the neighbor can only be held liable for intentionally injuring her or for gross misconduct.
C)It may depend on Kelley's age.
D)Yes, the neighbor is strictly liable.

Question 31

Tommie, a six-year-old child, was seriously injured when he stuck a fork into an electrical outlet at a restaurant. His parents sued the restaurant where the incident occurred, claiming it should have had child protective guards on the outlets even though no law required the restaurant to do so. Whether the restaurant is liable will be dependent upon whether

A)the incident was reasonably foreseeable.
B)the court views Tommie as a licensee or a trespassing child.
C)this is negligence per se .
D)this is an ultrahazardous activity.

Question 32

Phillip was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Marsha's pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Marsha and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Phillip down, injuring his knee. Phillip sued the mechanic. In applying the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad  decision to this case, Phillip would

A)win because the mechanic was negligent in overinflating the tire, which led to Phillip's injury.
B)win based on negligence per se.
C)lose because the court would apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur .
D)lose because, although the mechanic's conduct was negligent toward Marsha, it was not a wrong in relation to Phillip, who was far away. The mechanic could not have foreseen injury to Phillip and therefore had no duty to him.

Question 33

To establish res ipsa loquitur in most states, the plaintiff must demonstrate all but which of the following?

A)direct evidence of the defendant's lack of due care
B)the harm ordinarily would not occur in the absence of negligence
C)the plaintiff had no role in causing the harm
D)the defendant had exclusive control of the thing that caused the harm

Question 34

What is a principal factor in the risk-utility test?

A)the value of the product
B)the gravity of the danger
C)the likelihood that danger will occur
D)All of these are correct.

Question 35

If a court applies res ipsa loquitur

A)the plaintiff needs to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence.
B)the plaintiff must prove the case by clear and convincing evidence.
C)the defendant has the burden of proving he or she is not liable.
D)the defendant is strictly liable.

Question 36

One morning, Miles accidentally dropped a thumbtack on the chair of the office manager where he worked. The office manager sat on the tack and, two days later, was hospitalized with an infection caused by the tack. Which of the following is correct?

A)Miles's actions were negligent.
B)No tort has been committed.
C)Miles committed an intentional tort.
D)Miles is strictly liable.

Question 37

A branch of tort law that imposes a much higher level of liability when harm results from ultrahazardous acts or defective products is referred to as

A)res ipsa loquitur.
B)strict liability.
C)heightened liability.
D)strict negligence.

Question 38

The test of "foreseeability" is generally used to determine the existence of which element of a negligence case?

A)Duty of due care
B)Breach
C)Factual cause
D)negligence per se

Question 39

Anders suffered a shock when his electric radio dropped into the bathtub--while Anders was taking a bath. Anders argued that he did not realize it was dangerous to operate an electric radio near his bathtub. If he sues the radio manufacturer for damages, which claim is he most likely to make?

A)res ipsa loquitur
B)negligent manufacture
C)failure to warn
D)negligent design

Question 40

A customer in a restaurant would be considered ________ to whom the restaurant owner owes a duty ________.

A)a licensee; to warn of known dangers.
B)an invitee; of reasonable care.
C)a social guest; only to avoid intentionally injuring him.
D)a licensee; of strict liability

Question 41

On Monday, Travis took his four-wheeler to Reppart's Equipment & Service for repair because the steering was not working properly. On Friday, he called Reppart's to see if his four-wheeler was ready because he wanted it for a weekend trip. Reppart's said they had done the major repairs but that the steering system still needed some work and they needed another few days to finish the repairs. Travis told them he would pick the four-wheeler up and use it for the weekend and then bring it back to have them finish their work. While riding with friends on the weekend, Travis ran into someone because the steering stuck and he couldn't swerve to avoid them. Discuss how a court would determine causation in a negligence suit against Travis.

Question 42

A contractor used dynamite to loosen a rocky hillside. The blast from the dynamite caused a house foundation to crack. The house was located over a half-mile away from the dynamite site. The contractor was careful when using the dynamite, and no allegation of negligence is made. However, the house owner claims the contractor is liable for damage to the foundation. Is the house owner correct? Explain.