Question $38$:

Scenario:

Abdul had just bought a new dirt bike and was riding it around town for the first time. Abdul was curious how fast the dirt bike could go$.$ So$,$ Abdul put the bike in fifth gear and pulled back the throttle as far as it could go$.$ Abdul, going full speed, approached a red light and crosswalk with Rita walking her dog across. Abdul slammed on the front brake, but the bike kept sliding forward and hit Rita, who suffered severe personal injuries as a result of the accident.

Rita sues Abdul for negligence. Abdul$$s main defense is that he was new to riding dirt bikes and had no idea that it would take that long to stop.

Question: Will Abdul$$s lack of experience with the dirt bike be a defense?

Answer Choices:

A$.$ No$,$ because Abdul is strictly liable.

B$.$ Yes, because reasonableness is a subjective inquiry in which you can only be held to your own level of intelligence.

C$.$ No$,$ because Abdul$$s actions constitute an intentional tort, and the resulting harm was reasonably foreseeable.

D$.$ Yes, because by crossing the sidewalk Rita assumed the risk of Abdul hitting her.

E$.$ No$,$ because the standard of care is that of a reasonable man.