Exam 8: Negligence and Strict Liability

If a person's 150-pound sheep dog has a propensity to jump enthusiastically on visitors, the animal's keeper would be liable for any damages done by the dog's playfulness.

A defendant will be liable for all harm that can be traced back to the defendant's negligence.

Robin owns a dog. If there are no applicable statutes, what is her liability for damage if her dog digs up her neighbor's prize roses? Would it make any difference if the animal that destroys her neighbor's flower garden is the wild orangutan she owns?

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

Because of the harshness of the all-or-nothing contributory negligence rule, nearly all states have now substituted the last clear chance doctrine for contributory negligence.

The duty of employers includes the duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring, training, supervising, and retaining employees. This duty is independent of the vicarious liability of an employer for an employee's tortious conduct during the course of employment.

Res ipsa loquitur means "the thing speaks for itself" and it permits the jury to infer negligent conduct and causation from the mere occurrence of certain types of events.

In which of the following situations would a court be likely to find that the witness to the situation had an affirmative duty to act?

A ninety-year-old patient walked away from a nursing home and wandered onto some nearby railroad tracks. Once on the tracks, the patient stumbled and sprained his ankle. A few minutes later a train approached. The engineer saw the man on the track and could have stopped, but the train's brakes were defective. As a result, the train hit and killed the man. His family is suing the railroad for negligence in a state that follows the contributory negligence doctrine. In this case,

Seventeen-year-old Brice 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. In most states:

If negligence of the plaintiff and negligence of the defendant proximately caused the injury and damage sustained by the plaintiff, the plaintiff can recover some damages in those states where contributory negligence is still recognized.

In Soldano v. O'Daniels , the court re-examined the common-law rule of nonliability for not taking affirmative action to save someone from peril. The court considered which of the following factors with respect to imposing duties for affirmative action by third parties?

The general rule for the standard of care used in tort law is: a person is under a duty to all others at all times to exercise reasonable care for the safety of other persons and their property.

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

What is the difference between contributory negligence and comparative negligence? Why have so many states adopted comparative negligence?

Under the Second Restatement, a possessor of land has a legal duty to warn business invitees of obvious dangers that invitees should be able to discover themselves.

Res ipsa loquitur makes it easier for the defendant to prevail in a negligence action.

Which of the following is/are considered in determining the application of the reasonable person standard?

What activities give rise to strict liability and what defenses are available to strict liability?

By law, all apartment buildings in the state where Mary lives must have smoke alarms in the ceilings. Mary suffers smoke inhalation because the smoke alarm in her apartment building was not yet installed. To win a negligence action against the building owner, Mary would have to prove: