Tort Law 7th Edition J. Stanley Edwards, Traci Cull - Solutions

What conditions must be met to have an attractive nuisance?a. What characteristics of a child are taken into consideration when deciding whether the attractive-nuisance doctrine applies?
What is the rescue doctrine?
What duty is owed a known trespasser?a. What duty is owed to someone who trespasses on a limited area of a possessor’s land?
Who is considered a licensee, and what duty of care is owed a licensee?
Who is considered an invitee, and what duty of care is owed an invitee?a. How can one lose one’s invitee status?
What duty of care does a possessor owe to those outside their property?a. What distinction is made between artificial and natural conditions?
What are the duties of a tenant?
What are the duties of a landlord?
To what extent is a seller of land liable to a plaintiff injured by a defect the seller does not disclose to the buyer?a. What if the seller intentionally conceals the defect?b. What if the buyer has a reasonable opportunity to find and correct the defect?
Is there a common law duty to rescue someone in distress?a. Under what conditions does such a duty exist? Give an example.
What duty of care does a person have once they have begun to render emergency aid?
What is the voluntary-undertaking doctrine?
How does the duty of a public entity compare to that of a private individual?
Can a fetus recover for injuries sustained in utero as a result of a defendant’s actions?
What is the doctrine of respondeat superior?
What is the family-purpose doctrine?
What standard of care do states use if they no longer use the common law classification for those entering a possessor’s land?
How is breach of duty determined?
What is the Learned Hand formula, and how does it help in assessing reasonableness?
Explain how the Learned Hand formula could be used to assess whether defendants who fail to provide a childproof lock on the gate that leads to their swimming pool should be liable for the drowning death of their neighbor’s twoyear-old child.
Why is an objective standard used to evaluate the reasonableness of a defendant’s conduct?How would using a subjective standard affect these cases?
What is a reasonable person expected to know?
Which of the following characteristics of a defendant are taken into consideration when assessing reasonableness?a. mental stateb. intelligencec. emotional stated. intoxicatione. physical challenges, such as blindness
To what standard of care are children held?
To what standard of care are people held in emergency situations?
How does custom affect the evaluation of reasonableness?
To what standard of care are professionals held? What about specialists?
What is negligence per se and how does it assist a plaintiff in proving negligence?
What must a plaintiff show to prove negligence per se?
What are some of the defenses to negligence per se?
What are automobile-guest statutes and why were they introduced?
What is the status of automobile-guest statutes today?
What is the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur and how does it help plaintiffs?
What must a plaintiff prove before being able to rely on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur?
What are the possible consequences to the defendant if the plaintiff proves all of the elements of res ipsa loquitur?
True Or False To assess whether a defendant breached his duty of care, it must be determined whether the defendant acted reasonably.
True Or False In evaluating a defendant’s conduct, a jury is allowed the benefit of information the defendant did not have at the time they acted.
True Or False Under the Learned Hand formula, a cost/ benefit analysis is rejected.
True Or False In determining whether a defendant acted reasonably, the jury must consider the situation from the defendant’s perspective and state of mind.
True Or False In most instances in tort law an objective standard is used to assess the reasonableness of a defendant’s conduct because doing so reduces the uncertainties in the legal system and maximizes safety to members of the community.
True Or False A reasonable person is expected to know matters of common knowledge and scientific and natural laws of common knowledge.
True Or False Ignorance of the law is no excuse even if the law contradicts the custom of the community.
True Or False Courts generally do not hold insane people to a reasonable-person standard because they should not be held responsible for their actions.
True Or False The physical characteristics of a defendant are never taken into consideration when determining the reasonable-person standard.
True Or False Children who engage in activities reserved for adults are always held to the standard of care of a reasonable adult.
True Or False Defendants acting under emergency conditions must act reasonably, but they are not held to the standard of care of a medical professional.
True Or False A reasonable person is never expected to anticipate the criminal acts or intentional torts of others.
True Or False Adherence to custom is always conclusive evidence of reasonableness of conduct.
True Or False The courts can find an entire industry negligent even if no one in the industry has adopted adequate safety measures.
True Or False Professionals who are novices are held to the same standard of care as other more experienced members of the profession.
True Or False Specialists are held to a higher standard of care than other members of the profession.
True Or False Most courts consider a defendant’s violation of a statute as evidence of mere negligence rather than negligence per se, and mere negligence can be negated by evidence of due care.
True Or False In states that prohibit leaving keys in a parked car, a defendant is not necessarily negligent per se if they leave their keys in their car and the thief who steals the car is involved in an accident-causing injury to the plaintiff.
True Or False Violation of a statute always imposes an absolute duty of compliance.
True Or False Under the majority rule, when a criminal statute is violated, courts do not apply the criminal statutory standard to civil cases.
True Or False Compliance with a statute does not necessarily establish that a defendant was negligent.
True Or False The purpose of automobile-guest statutes was to discourage guests from suing their host drivers and prevent collusion between drivers and their guests.
Under the Learned Hand formula, the ____________ and ____________ of harm created by the defendant’s conduct are considered.
When determining the standard of care for a child, the ____________, ____________, and ____________ of the child are taken into consideration.
The _________ standard is used in determining whether defendant’s conduct is reasonable.
In an emergency, a defendant is expected to act __________ or can be found to be liable for their actions.
Professionals are held to a ____________ standard of care than those not in the profession.
____________ ____________ statutes hold drivers of vehicles liable for injuries resulting to guests in their car only under circumstances of extreme misconduct.
____________ ____________ ____________ means “the thing speaks for itself.”
In a res ipsa loquitor case, the jury is allowed to infer ___________.
In considering the burden-of-precaution factor in the Learned Hand formula, courts:a. consider the cost to the defendant in taking precautions.b. consider the social utility of the defendant’s conduct.c. consider both a and b.d. do not consider either a or b.
Under the Learned Hand formula, a defendant is liable:a. if the burden of precaution outweighs the gravity of harm multiplied by the likelihood of harm.b. if the likelihood of harm times the gravity of harm outweighs the burden of precaution.c. if the burden of precaution equals the gravity of harm
Those who are generally held to the standard of care of a reasonable person include:a. intoxicated people.b. people who are emotionally unstable.c. people who are of substandard intelligence.d. all of the above.
When a defendant violates a statute, they are negligent per se if:a. the statute applies to the facts of the case.b. there is a causal link between the defendant’s act and the plaintiff’s injury.c. both a and b.d. neither a nor b.
To prove negligence per se, the plaintiff must show that the defendant violated a statute and that the:a. statute was designed to protect against the kind of harm sustained by the plaintiff.b. the plaintiff was a member of the class the statute was intended to protect.c. both a and b.d. neither a
A plaintiff cannot resort to the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur if:a. it is just as likely that someone other than the defendant caused the plaintiff’s injury.b. there are multiple defendants.c. they cannot show that negligence is the only possible cause of their injuries.d. all of the above.
What is the difference between actual cause and proximate cause?
Describe how each of the following is used to prove actual cause.a. but-for testb. substantial-factor testc. alternate-liability theoryd. market-share-liability theorye. concerted-action theory
When do courts opt to use the substantialfactor test rather than the but-for test?
How do the alternative-liability and marketshare-liability theories assist plaintiffs in proving their case? How are they different?
What is the “lost chance of recovery” theory, and how does it help plaintiffs?
Why is proximate cause sometimes referred to as legal cause?
What are the facts in Palsgraf?a. What was the issue before the court?b. What did the majority rule, and why?c. Why did the dissent disagree?d. Do most courts follow the majority or the dissent?
What is the direct-causation rule?a. How was it developed in Polemis?b. Why is this rule criticized?
What is the relationship between duty and proximate cause?
Explain the eggshell skull rule that is an exception to Cardozo’s rule of foreseeability.
Explain the difference between intervening and superseding causes.a. Give an example of an intervening cause.b. Give an example of a superseding cause.
Under what circumstances will the courts find an unforeseeable intervening cause not to be a superseding cause?
Is proximate cause a jury question or a question for the judge?
When is rescue considered an intervening cause?
True Or False Actual causation relates to the closeness of the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injuries.
True Or False The but-for test does not encompass situations involving concurrent causes.
True Or False Under the substantial-factor test, if concurrent causes produce a single, indivisible harm, both factors can be deemed the actual cause of the plaintiff’s injuries.
True Or False The plaintiff must prove with clear and convincing evidence that the defendant was the cause of their injuries.
True Or False If two defendants are negligent but only one could have caused the plaintiff’s injury, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove which defendant caused their injury.
True Or False Under the market-share-liability theory, a plaintiff can recover even if they cannot prove which defendant from among multiple defendants actually caused their injury.
True Or False With the market-share-liability theory, the plaintiff can prevail even if they cannot prove the nature of the defendant’s conduct.
True Or False Under the lost chance of recovery theory, a plaintiff can recover even if they cannot prove that the defendant’s negligence resulted in a loss of life.
True Or False Proximate cause reflects a judicial concern that defendants should not be liable for highly improbable consequences stemming from their negligence.
True Or False Direct causation holds defendants liable for the consequences arising from their actions that are unforeseeable.
True Or False A third person’s criminal or intentionally tortious conduct is never considered a superseding cause.
True Or False If the acts of a third party are not surprising, they will be considered intervening causes, and the acts of the defendant that precipitate the third party’s conduct will be considered the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries.
True Or False If an intervening cause is unforeseeable, a defendant is never liable.
True Or False A plaintiff must be a foreseeable plaintiff to recover.
Under the _______________ _______________ test the defendant will be considered the actual cause of the plaintiff’s injuries if those injuries would not have occurred but for the defendant’s negligence.

Showing 300 - 400 of 1299

Tort Law 7th Edition J. Stanley Edwards, Traci Cull - Solutions

Step by Step Answers