Help

Question 5 (10 points) Defendant Danny had exclusive control over a piano which he was winching into a third floor window in a building downtown. Plaintiff Penny was walking innocently down the sidewalk past the building when she was hit by the falling piano. Penny sued Danny for negligence. The court applied the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The court's application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur has the following effect: Strict liability in tort applies and Danny is automatically liable O Penny's comparative responsibility is used to reduce her recovery Punitive damages are awarded to Penny as a means of punishing Danny The burden of proof shifts to Danny to prove he was not negligent