Filters
Question type

Study Flashcards

Which of the following has been adopted by courts to aid plaintiffs in establishing negligence claims?


A) Res ipsa loquitur only.
B) Negligence per se only.
C) Assumption of risk only.
D) Res ipsa loquitur and negligence per se.
E) Res ipsa loquitur, negligence per se and assumption of risk.

F) B) and C)
G) All of the above

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Reference - Pet Police. Millie breeds German Shepherd dogs. Bernard, who lives down the street, took in a stray dog loosely identified as a Corgi-plus. The dog, Casanova, would definitely be classified as a mixed breed. Bernard allowed Casanova to roam freely. Unfortunately, Casanova went to visit Millie's pure-bred German Shepherd. Puppies resulted which were Shepherd and Corgi-plus puppies. Millie was incensed. She started a campaign to round up all of the stray dogs, including Casanova, and haul them off to the animal shelter. She picked up a few cats as well. She posted signs all over the neighborhood saying that no animal, neither dog, cat, nor fowl, should come into her yard and that she was going to begin shooting the next time, period. Understandably, Bernard and some of the other neighbors take offense. Bernard comes to Millie's house while she is working in the yard. He walks behind her and shoves her. Millie did not see him coming. Millie turned around and proceeded to have a heated conversation with Bernard. Millie drew her fist back and told Bernard that she was going to punch him in the nose. Millie started to punch Bernard but he stepped back, and all she managed to do was jab him in the shoulder, causing no actual pain. Sally, who was going by on the street, saw Millie attempting to hit Bernard. Sally came over and grabbed Millie's hands, pinning Millie's hands behind her back. Millie's threat to punch Bernard in the nose constitutes a[n] ____________:


A) Assault and battery.
B) Battery.
C) Assault.
D) Justified retribution.
E) Negligence.

F) B) and E)
G) B) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Good Samaritan statutes impose liability upon people for refusing to stop at accident scenes.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Under which of the following does the court determine the percentage of the fault of the defendant with the defendant then being liable for that percentage of the plaintiff's damages, with no requirement that the defendant be more than 50% at fault?


A) Assumption of the risk.
B) Last-clear-chance.
C) Modified comparative negligence.
D) Pure comparative negligence.
E) Both modified comparative negligence and last-clear-chance.

F) B) and D)
G) B) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Under which of the following does the court determine the percentage of fault of the defendant requiring that the defendant be more than 50% at fault before the plaintiff can recover?


A) Assumption of the risk.
B) Last-clear-chance.
C) Modified comparative negligence.
D) Pure comparative negligence.
E) Both modified comparative negligence and last-clear-chance.

F) B) and E)
G) A) and B)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Reference - Cat Chaser. Annette, who is angry because her neighbor, William, allows his dog to chase her cat, decides that she wants to get even. She moves a number of farm animals into her backyard and begins playing music at all hours of the night. She also steals a nice lawn chair off of William's deck. She intends to keep the chair and not give it back. Annette further took a rake off of William's deck that she plans to return after she finishes raking her leaves. William did not give her permission to take the rake. William is unhappy about the whole situation and wants to sue. What action would William have against Annette for taking the rake?


A) Trespass to personal property.
B) Conversion.
C) Private nuisance.
D) Negligence.
E) Harassment.

F) B) and C)
G) C) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

A plaintiff in a negligence suit may choose whether the plaintiff wishes pure comparative negligence or modified comparative negligence to be applied by the court.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Reference - Blow-Up. Jeanie is hauling several containers of gasoline in her vehicle in preparation for riding her personal watercraft. On the way home, Jeanie stops at the automatic teller machine at her bank and exits her car. Holly pulls behind her and negligently rear-ends Jeanie's car. The car explodes and results in the bank building burning to the ground. The bank sues Holly for negligence claiming that Holly should have to pay for the entire bank building. The bank claimed that it should be able to recover under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine. Which of the following is true regarding whether Holly is the proximate cause of the bank burning?


A) Holly is not the proximate cause of the bank burning because it was not foreseeable that Jeanie would have gasoline in the back of her car that would result in the fire.
B) Holly is not the proximate case of the accident because her actions were not the cause in fact of the accident.
C) Holly's actions were not the proximate cause of the accident because actual causation cannot be established.
D) Holly's actions were the proximate cause of the bank's burning because actual cause is present.
E) Holly's actions were the proximate cause of the bank's burning because cause in fact can be established.

F) A) and E)
G) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Reference - Hair Stylist Woes. Maryann went to see her hair stylist, Candy. Maryann who had black, curly hair, requested straight, blond hair. Candy told her that she could make that change, but there would be significant upkeep involved. Candy made the change, but Maryann did not do the upkeep required. She also falsely claimed that Candy did not do what Maryann asked her to do, that Candy lied to her, and that Candy was professionally incompetent. Maryann made the statements to friends of hers. She also wrote an editorial in her college newspaper to the effect that Candy's shop should be avoided at all costs because Candy was incompetent. In fact, Candy was a good hair stylist and enjoyed a good reputation up until the time that Maryann started her criticism. Candy threatened to sue Maryann for defamation, but Maryann told Candy that Candy could not prevail because Candy could not prove loss of income. Candy had to admit that while her reputation had been damaged somewhat, the damage was primarily among the college population. Her income kept increasing from other segments of the community, and she had suffered no net loss. Statements made by Maryann to her friends that were defamatory of Candy are what type of defamation?


A) Libel.
B) Slander.
C) Both libel and slander.
D) Neither libel nor slander because an editorial was involved.
E) Neither libel nor slander because the falsehood involved matters of appearance not business-related matters.

F) B) and E)
G) None of the above

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Which of the following occurs when a plaintiff expressly agrees, usually in a written contract, to assume the risk posed by the defendant's behavior?


A) Implied assumption of the risk.
B) Express assumption of the risk.
C) Express assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
D) Implied assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
E) Assumption by contract.

F) A) and B)
G) B) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Reference - Hair Stylist Woes. Maryann went to see her hair stylist, Candy. Maryann who had black, curly hair, requested straight, blond hair. Candy told her that she could make that change, but there would be significant upkeep involved. Candy made the change, but Maryann did not do the upkeep required. She also falsely claimed that Candy did not do what Maryann asked her to do, that Candy lied to her, and that Candy was professionally incompetent. Maryann made the statements to friends of hers. She also wrote an editorial in her college newspaper to the effect that Candy's shop should be avoided at all costs because Candy was incompetent. In fact, Candy was a good hair stylist and enjoyed a good reputation up until the time that Maryann started her criticism. Candy threatened to sue Maryann for defamation, but Maryann told Candy that Candy could not prevail because Candy could not prove loss of income. Candy had to admit that while her reputation had been damaged somewhat, the damage was primarily among the college population. Her income kept increasing from other segments of the community, and she had suffered no net loss. The defamation printed in the school newspaper would be which of the following?


A) Libel.
B) Slander.
C) Both libel and slander.
D) Neither libel nor slander because an editorial was involved.
E) Neither libel nor slander because the falsehood involved matters of appearance not business-related matters.

F) A) and D)
G) C) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Under which of the following situations does the tort of trespass to realty occur?


A) When a person causes an object to be placed on the land of another without the landowner's permission.
B) When a person stays on the land of another when the owner tells him to depart.
C) When a person refuses to remove something he placed on the property that the owner of the property asked him remove.
D) When a person causes an object to be placed on the land of another without the landowner's permission, when a person stays on the land of another when the owner tells him to depart, and when a person refuses to remove something he placed on the property that the owner of the property asked him remove.
E) None of these because a person does not commit trespass to realty unless it can be established that the person initially entered the land of another without permission.

F) A) and E)
G) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

To use the assumption of the risk defense successfully, a defendant must prove that the plaintiff voluntarily and unreasonably encountered the risk of the actual harm the defendant caused.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Discuss what is needed in order to establish damages in defamation actions. Address whether special proof is needed and, if so, under what circumstances.

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

In the case of libel, general damages ar...

View Answer

Which of the following must the defendant prove in order to rely upon the defense of contributory negligence?


A) Only that the plaintiff's conduct fell below the standard of care needed to prevent unreasonable risk of harm.
B) Only that a failure of the plaintiff was a contributing cause to the plaintiff's injury.
C) Only that the plaintiff violated the last-clear-chance doctrine.
D) That the plaintiff's conduct fell below the standard of care needed to prevent unreasonable risk of harm and also that the plaintiff's failure was a contributing cause to the plaintiff's injuries.
E) That the plaintiff's conduct fell below the standard of care needed to prevent unreasonable risk of harm; that the plaintiff's failure was a contributing cause to the plaintiff's injuries; and also that the plaintiff failed to abide by the last-clear-chance doctrine.

F) B) and C)
G) A) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Which of the following is not a typical type of compensatory damage?


A) Pain and suffering.
B) Cost to repair damaged property.
C) Medical expenses.
D) Attorney fees.
E) None of these.

F) None of the above
G) A) and E)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Which of the following is a doctrine that allows the plaintiff to recover damages despite proof of contributory negligence as long as the defendant had a final clear opportunity to avoid the action that injured the plaintiff?


A) Assumption of risk.
B) Last-clear-chance doctrine.
C) Modified risk doctrine.
D) Modified comparative doctrine.
E) There is no such doctrine.

F) A) and B)
G) A) and C)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Assumption of the risk is a doctrine which makes it easier for a plaintiff to prevail in a lawsuit.

A) True
B) False

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

The violation of a duty of care is called _______.


A) Breach of responsibility.
B) Breach of statute.
C) Breach of duty.
D) Objectionable breaching.
E) Negligent breaching.

F) B) and E)
G) B) and D)

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Steven knows that his dog has bitten several people. Cindy comes to visit him but Steven does not tell her about the dog's propensities. Unfortunately, the dog nips Cindy and she is required to have some stitches in her ankle. Which of the following is the most likely result if Cindy sues Steven?


A) Cindy will win on a negligence theory.
B) Cindy will win on both a negligence and strict liability theory.
C) Cindy will lose because she did not incur serious injuries.
D) Cindy will lose because she assumed the risk of injury by coming near the dog.
E) Steven will lose because the assumption of the risk doctrine.

F) A) and B)
G) All of the above

Correct Answer

verifed

verified

Showing 41 - 60 of 111

Related Exams

Show Answer