Exam 8: Negligence and Strict Liability

Define appropriation and give an example.

Comparative negligence by a plaintiff results in the plaintiff's being completely unable to recover.

The rule which permits the jury to infer both negligent conduct and causation from the mere occurrence of certain events is:

Which of the following is correct with respect to the reasonable person standard?

Which of the following is a defense that a defendant could raise in an action based on strict liability?

In determining the duty of care owed by a defendant using the reasonable person standard,the court will consider all of the following factors except:

A reasonable person,as used in the law of torts,is a fictitious individual who is always careful,prudent,and never negligent.

In applying the reasonable person standard,the court takes into account a person's physical,but not mental,handicaps.

To which of the following does a property owner owe the highest duty of care?

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur would permit the court to infer negligence in which of the following situations?

Special relations between the parties,such as babysitter and child,may impose a duty of reasonable care to aid or protect the child in situations where the duty would not otherwise exist.

Wyatt and Sally started a charcoal fire for Sally's backyard barbecue and left it uncovered.Then Sally went into the kitchen to make hamburger patties.While Sally was inside,Wyatt backed up to catch a football and hit the grill,knocking the coals onto his feet.In a modified comparative negligence state,who is liable?

If a pet raccoon gets loose from a cage and harms someone,the owner can escape liability by showing that he took great care to keep the animal confined.

Seventeen-year-old Todd has just received his driver's license.He is driving a little too fast one day and slams into the back of another car,which has just stopped for a stop sign.

A social guest is a public invitee.

The Third Restatement of Torts limits the defense of assumption of risk to express assumption of the risk.

Defenses to an action in strict liability include:

A possessor of land is under a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect invitees against dangerous conditions they are unlikely to discover.

Where two factors,each of which is sufficient to bring about the harm in question,together cause a harm,the "but for" rule of causation is not useful.

The Third Restatement of Torts has abandoned the doctrine of implied voluntary assumption of risk in tort actions.