How can we help?

You can also find more resources in our Help Center.

80 terms

Ch 7

STUDY
PLAY
If one person's act harms another, there is no liability unless the actor intended the harm(T/F)
F
If one person's act harms another, there may be liability for negligence even if the actor did not intend there harm(T/F)
T
To determine whether a duty of care has been breached a judge asks how he or she would have acted in the same circumstances(T/F)
F
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(T/F)
T
An ordinary person standard determines whether allegedly negligent conduct resulted in a breach of a duty of care(T/F)
F
A reasonable person standard determines whether a person could have avoided suffering harm from anothers alledgedly negligent act(T/F)
F
Business owners have no duty to exercise reasonable care to protect invitees(T/F)
F
No one is expected to exercise a reasonable standard of care in every activity(T/F)
F
The degree of care to be exercised in a situation can vary with a person's profession or occupation(T/F)
T
To avoid liability for negligence, a business owner must protect its patrons against all risks(T/F)
F
If no harm results from an allegedly negligent act, there is no liability(T/F)
T
Under the theory of negligence, the duty of care requires one person to aid another who has suffered harm frm someone's negligence(T/F)
F
Under the theory of negligence, the duty of care requires one peson to come to the aid of another in "peril"(T/F)
F
Liability for negligence requires a finding of causation in fact and a determination of proximate cause(T/F)
T
In theory, causation in fact is limitless(T/F)
T
For purposes of establishing negligence, causation in fact exists if an injury would have occurred even without the defendant's act(T/F)
F
Under the theory of negligence, harm must be foreseeable to be considered the proximate cause of an injury(T/F)
T
Proximate cause exists when the connection between an act and an injury is strong enough to justify imposing liability(T/F)
T
Aperson assumes all risks associated with any activity in which he or she participates(T/F)
F
An assumption of risk defense doesn't require that a risk be voluntarily assumed(T/F)
F
Self defense is a defense available in an action based on a negligence theory(T/F)
F
A person assumes any risk that is different from a greater than the risk normally carried by am activity(T/F)
F
A superseding cause is an intervening event thatimposes liability on a defendant for injuries caused by the intervening event(T/F)
F
Assumption of risk can be raised as a defense in a negligence suit(T/F)
T
under the doctrine of comparative negligence both the plaintiffs and the defendants negligence are taken into consideration(T/F)
T
Only foreseeable intervening event can break the connection between a wrongful act and an injury to another(T/F)
F
the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applies if an event causing harm doesn't normally occur in the absence of negligence(T/F)
T
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(T/F)
F
Under a dram shop act or a social host statute, liability can be imposed without proof of negligence(T/F)
T
In many states, the plaintiff's negligence is a defense that may be raised in a negligence suit(T/F)
T
The extreme risk of an activity is a primary basis for imposing strict liability(T/F)
T
Negligence per se may occur on the violation of a statute(T/F)
T
Under the doctrine of strict liability, liability is strictly based on the "obvious" fault of the defendant(T/F)
F
The basis for applying strict liability is an intentional wrongful act(T/F)
F
One of the requirements for a suit based on strict liability is a failure to exercise due care(T/F)
F
One characteristic of an abnormally dangerous activity is that it is not commonly performed in a certain area(T/F)
T
One characteristic of an abnormally dangerous activity is that it involves a low degree of risk(T/F)
F
Strict liability is imposed for reasons other than fault(T/F)
T
Person who keeps a wild animal is always strictly liable for any harm that the animal inflicts(T/F)
T
A person who keeps a domestic animal is always strictly liable for any harm that the animal inflicts(T/F)
F
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 reasonable person
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 reasonable person
roy owns building in which shelly rents an apartment. the sidewalks around the buliding are in poor repair. many sections have buckled from the growth of tree roots over the years. as the owner of the building roy has a duty to
repair the sidewalks
dependable appliances, a retail store, must use reasonable care on its premises to warn its patrons of
hidden risk
roy owns building in which shelly rents an apartment. the sidewalks around the buliding are in poor repair. many sections have buckled from the growth of tree roots over the years.as a tenant in the building, shelly has a duty to
do nothing
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
constructive notice
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
win, bc the spilled soda was foreseeable
to protect its customers and other business invitees, sav-mart grocery stores corporation must warn them of
concealed dangers
leon files a suit against moira, a medical doctor, alleging negligence. as a physician, moira is held to the standard of
a reasonable physician
lana hires mike, an architect, to design a warehouse. lana is dissatisfied with the look of the new building and sues mike, alleging negligence. mike can successfully defend against the suit by proving that
lana was not injured in any way
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
dona was not injured
dirk is driving a sport utility vehicle is in which elin is a passenger when they are invovled in a traffic accident, and elin is injured. liability may be imposed on dirk for elin's injury if dirk's driving is
the causation in fact and the proximate cause of the injury
sam, an engineer, supervises the construction of a new bridge. when the bridge collapses 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
other engineers
molly shoots norm with opal's pistol. the proximate cause of norm being shot is most likely attributable to
molly only
nick sees opal, a stranger, in peril, but doesn't attempt to rescue her. opal could successfully sue nick for
nothing
pam files a successful suit against quantity stores based on quantity's negligence. Normally, an award in such a suit consists of
compensatory damages
john sees that kris is about to step into the path of an oncoming bus. if john doesn't warn kris of the danger, john is liable
under no circumstances
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 ria's family's suit against phil, his failure to heed the signs of the approaching storm will most likely be held
the causation in fact, but not the proximate cause of rita's loss
kay carelessly bumps into lyle, knocking him to the ground. kay has committed the tort of negligence
only if lyle is injured
marie, a driver for national transport company, causes a fivecar accident on an interstate highway. marie and national are liable to
only those whose injuries could reasonably have been foreseen
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
cause in fact
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
superseding cause
ralph, a van driver for standard delivery company, causes a multi-vehicle accident on a city street. ralph and standard are liable to
only those whose injuries could have been reasonably foreseen
leo slips and falls in the mornin' breakfast cafe 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
$0
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
palsgraf v. long island railroad co
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
contributory negligence
liu enters mountain triathlon, an athletic competition in which liu has never competed. regarding the risk of injury, liu assumes the risks
normally associated with the triathlon
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 negligence principles, frank would recover
$40,000
Clyde enters desert decathlon, an athletic competition in which clyde has often completed. regarding the risk of injury, clyde assumes the risks
normally associated with the decathlon
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
under any circumstances
beth is injured in a car accident and sues cal, alleging negligence. cal claims that beth wsa driving more carelessly than he was. comparative negligence may reduce beth's recovery
even if beth was only slightly at fault
a state statute requires machinery in industrial plants to include automatic shut-off swithces accessible to each employee working on the machine. steel company's equipment doesnt have the switches. Trudy, a steel company employee, suffers an injury that an accessible shut-off switch would have prevented. trudys best theory for recovery against steel company is
negligence per se
an iowa 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
negligence per se
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
res ipsa loquitur
in an emergency situation, lori renders aid to mike, who needs help. mike would most likely be prohibited from sung lori for negligence unde a
good samaritan statute
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
evon and gina
earth movers inc uses dynamite to prepare land for highway projects. strict liabilty is imposed on this activity bc
the acitivity is of a dangerous nature
lyn is injured when she is struck by debris floating onher 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
rylands v. fletcher
eva owns fast rate salvage, a demolition comapny. a demolition by a fast rate crew injures glen, a passerby, under the theory of strict liability, eva must pay for glen's injury
whether or not the fast rate crew was at fault
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 activity is
valuable resources only