Question $2(4\mathrm{.}5$ points$)$

In the Yania v$.$ Bigan case where the deceased jumped into a strip mine hole and drowned, the court held that

the owner was liable since owners of land are strictly liable for persons injured on their property.

the owner was liable since he had taunted $($teased$)$ the deceased by enticing him to jump.

the owner was not liable since a landowner has no duty to rescue persons in danger that are on his property.

the owner was liable since a landowner has both a moral and a legal duty to rescue people in peril on his property.

the owner was liable since there was evidence that the deceased did not have a sufficient mental capacity to realize the seriousness of his actions.