Smith and Robersons Business Law 16th Edition Mann Test Bank Download

Solution Manual for Smith and Robersons Business Law 16th
Edition Mann Roberts 1285428250 9781285428253

Full download link at:
Solution manual: https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-manual-
for-smith-and-robersons-business-law-16th-edition-mann-
roberts-1285428250-9781285428253/
Test bank: https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-smith-and-
robersons-business-law-16th-edition-mann-roberts-
1285428250-9781285428253/
Chapter 8. Negligence and Strict Liability
1. A blind person will be held to the standard of care of a reasonable blind person rather than that of the reasonable
sighted person for purposes of determining negligence.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
LEARNING OBJECTIVES: SRBL.MANN.15. 08.02 - 08.02
NATIONAL STANDARDS: United States - AICPA: BB-Risk Analysis
STATE STANDARDS: United States - NC - AICPA BB-Legal
TOPICS: A-Head: Negligence
KEYWORDS: Blooms: Knowledge
2. In applying the reasonable person standard, the court takes into account a person's physical, but not mental,
handicaps.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
DIFFICULTY: Easy
3. The standard of conduct to which a child must conform to avoid being negligent is that of a reasonably careful
person of the same age, intelligence, and experience under the circumstances..
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
4. A person who falls asleep while driving would not be liable for any resulting injury since it would be an unavoidable
accident.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
5. In the majority of states, in a case of negligence per se the plaintiff would only have to prove violation of a statute in
order to show negligent conduct.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Moderate
KEYWORDS: Blooms: Comprehension
6. Parents are not liable to a storekeeper for the destruction caused by their children if they permit the children to run
wild through the store.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
7. A reasonable person, as used in the law of torts, is a fictitious individual who is always careful, prudent, and never
negligent.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
8. Compliance with a legislative enactment or administrative regulation does not prevent a finding of negligence if a
reasonable person would have taken additional precautions to avoid harm.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
KEYWORDS: Blooms: Analysis
9. In all states, a sixteen-year-old who drives a car will not be held to the same standard of care as an adult for
purposes of determining negligence.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
10. Where two factors, each of which is sufficient to bring about the harm in question, together cause a harm, the "but
for" rule of causation is not useful.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
11. A defendant will be liable for all harm that can be traced back to the defendant's negligence.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
12. All intervening events that occur subsequent to the defendant's negligent conduct will relieve the defendant of
liability.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
13. 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.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
14. Comparative negligence by a plaintiff results in the plaintiff's being completely unable to recover.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
15. The owner of a dog will always be strictly liable if the dog bites someone.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
TOPICS: A-Head: Strict Liability
KEYWORDS: Blooms: Application
16. In some instances, people may be held liable for injuries they have caused even though they have not acted
intentionally or negligently.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
17. Tom's dog has bitten three mailmen, but Tom can't bear to chain him up. When the dog bites the newspaper delivery
person, Tom will be strictly liable.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
18. If a raccoon gets loose from a cage and harms someone, the owner can escape liability by showing that he took
great care to keep the animal confined.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
19. The lawful possessor of land is liable to adult trespassers for failure to maintain the land in a reasonably safe
condition.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
20. In determining whether a defendant’s conduct is reasonable in an emergency not created by the defendant, the
standard is that of a reasonable person under the circumstances.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
21. Special relations between the parties, such as babysitter and child, may impose a duty of reasonable care to aid or
protect the child in situations where the duty would not otherwise exist.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
22. A widely applied test for causation in fact is the "but-for" test.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
23. The Third Restatement of Torts limits the defense of assumption of risk to express assumption of the risk.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
24. A tiger gets loose from the tent of a circus and mauls a passerby. The circus claims it has always treated the animal
well and that it was not at all negligent in its handling of the animal. The circus has no liability for the injury caused
by the animal.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
25. A possessor of land is under a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect invitees against dangerous conditions they
are unlikely to discover.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
26. If a person's 150-pound sheep dog has a tendency to jump enthusiastically on visitors, the animal's keeper would not
be liable for any damages done by the dog's playfulness.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
27. The Third Restatement of Torts has abandoned the doctrine of implied voluntary assumption of risk in tort actions.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
28. Ted is informed that his eight-year-old child is shooting in the street with a .22 rifle. Ted fails to take the gun away
from the child. The child unintentionally shoots Bill, a pedestrian. Ted is liable to Bill.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
29. A licensee for purposes of tort law is a person invited upon land as a member of the public or for a business purpose.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
30. A social guest is a public invitee.

a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
31. The general rule in negligence is that a person is under a duty to all others at all times to exercise reasonable care for
the safety of others.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
32. In determining a defendant's liability for negligence, his or her superior skill or knowledge will be attributed in
applying the reasonable person standard, thus increasing the chance that the defendant may be held liable.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
33. If a defendant acts under emergency conditions, these conditions will be taken into account in applying the
reasonable person standard.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
34. Negligence per se is a defense in a negligence case.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
35. There is an established rule in the law of torts that even one who has not created a peril has a duty to take
affirmative action to assist an imperiled person, no matter what the relationship with that person, when the imperiled
person can be saved from harm at little or no personal risk to the rescuer.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
36. A number of states have included social guests in the invitee category, although they have traditionally been labeled
as licensees.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
37. Res ipsa loquitur makes it easier for the defendant to prevail in a negligence action.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
38. Even though contributory negligence is proven by a defendant in a state in which it acts as a complete bar to
recovery, the plaintiff may still recover if the defendant had the last clear chance to avoid the injury but did not avail
himself of the chance.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
39. 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.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
40. Comparative negligence has replaced the contributory negligence doctrine in most states.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
41. Some states have today merged the implied assumption of risk doctrine into their comparative negligence systems.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
42. Workers’ compensation is a form of strict liability.

a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
43. While comparative negligence is generally not a defense in a strict liability case, contributory negligence generally is
a successful defense.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: False
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
44. In an action for negligence, five elements must be proved: a duty of care, breach of that duty, factual cause, harm,
and proximate cause.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
45. Two of the factors that are taken into consideration in determining the scope of liability for negligent conduct are
foreseeability and superseding cause.
a. True
b. False
ANSWER: True
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
46. Mark is out sailing in his boat one evening when he hears a young girl crying for help in the lake. Which of the
following is true?
a. Mark MUST help the girl or he will be liable for negligence.
b. Mark must help the girl ONLY if he knows her.
c. Mark MUST help the girl if he is the girl's uncle.
d. Mark MUST help the girl if he begins to rescue her and moves her to a position farther from the shore.
ANSWER: d
POINTS: 1
47. By law, all apartment buildings in Mary’s state must have smoke alarms in the ceilings. If Mary suffers smoke
inhalation because the smoke alarm in her apartment building was not yet installed and Mary sues the owner for
negligence, Mary would have to prove:
a. a duty existed toward her.
b. a breach of that duty.
c. injury and causation.
d. All of these.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
48. Which of the following is correct with respect to the reasonable person standard?
a. It makes considers whether the person has specialized skill or training.
b. It makes allowance for physical disability.
c. It applies an individualized test to children that takes into consideration the child's age, background, and
experience.
d. All of these.
ANSWER: d
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
49. Rick's driveway has potholes. He has been thrown from his bike several times because of them. If Rick invites his
biking friends for a barbecue, what must he do to escape liability for any harm to them?
a. Repair the potholes.
b. Post signs saying "slow to 15 mph."
c. Telephone his friends to warn them about the potholes.
d. None of these.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
50. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur would permit the court to infer negligence in which of the following situations?
a. A can of peas fell off the shelf onto your foot.
b. A sign over a storefront fell on your head.
c. Neither of these situations.
d. Both of these situations.
ANSWER: d
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
51. Chris was driving a car with defective brakes very slowly down Fifth Avenue looking for a parking place. Mindy
jumped out into the street five feet in front of his car. Chris could not avoid hitting her. What is Chris's best defense
to the charge of negligence?
a. Mindy had a mental deficiency.
b. Chris was not negligent since he did not have a statutory duty to keep his brakes in top condition.
c. Mindy illegally crossed in the middle of the street, which was a superseding cause of the accident.
d. Chris was lawfully seeking a parking place and did not see her jump out.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
52. Henry was burning leaves in his backyard. One of the burning leaves was lifted by the wind into Emilio's yard next
door. It landed on the lawn mower which exploded, setting fire to the wooden lawn furniture. Henry's best argument
against liability would be:
a. that the leaf was not a substantial factor in causing the damage.
b. res ipsa loquitur.
c. that it was not foreseeable that the lawn mower would explode.
d. that the damage was not caused by the leaf but by the gasoline.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
53. An action for negligence consists of five elements, each of which the plaintiff must prove. These elements include:
a. harm.
c. a reasonable person.
d. All of these.
ANSWER: a
POINTS: 1
54. Joe intentionally pushed Bill into a fence negligently erected by Sam around Sam's swimming pool. The fence caved
in and Bill nearly drowned. Under the Second Restatement, who is liable?
a. Sam, because of his negligent conduct.
b. Sam, because Joe's conduct would be foreseeable.
c. Joe, because of his intentional intervening conduct.
d. Sam and Joe, because they both contributed to the harm.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
55. Pat and Sally started a charcoal fire for Sally's backyard barbecue and left it uncovered. Then Sally went into the
kitchen to make hamburger patties. While Sally was inside, Pat backed up to catch a football and hit the grill,
knocking the coals onto his feet. In a modified comparative negligence state, who is liable?
a. Sally is liable for ALL of Pat's injuries.
b. If Sally is found negligent, Sally is liable for a proportionate share of Pat's injuries unless Pat’s negligence was
as great as or greater than Sally’s.
c. Sally is not liable for any of Pat's injuries.
d. Sally is liable for Pat's injuries only if Pat was more negligent than Sally.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
56. Cal sprayed pesticide on his crops in a very careful manner on a windless day. Nevertheless, some of the pesticide
spray fell on his neighbor's side of the fence and contaminated the feed for the chickens. The chickens died, and the
neighbor sues. What is the likely result?
a. Cal is not liable because he was not negligent in his spraying operation.
b. Cal is not liable because the neighbor assumed the risk of damage to the feed by placing it so close to the
fence.
c. Cal is liable because spraying pesticides is an abnormally dangerous activity.
d. Cal is not liable for the damage because of contributory negligence.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
57. If a statute establishing a reasonable person standard of conduct is found to be applicable to a fact situation, then the
courts will hold that an unexcused violation of that statute which causes an injury to another is:
a. strict liability.
c. negligence per se.
d. assumption of the risk.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
58. Mr. and Mrs. Weaver have a duty to:

a. control the behavior of their minor son with regard to foreseeable risks.
b. merely warn their dependent son regarding his activities related to third persons involving foreseeable risks.
c. Either (a) or (b), depending upon the circumstances.
d. use reasonable care under the circumstances to third persons with regard to foreseeable risks that arise within
the family relationship no matter what their son’s age.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
59. Which of the following is/are considered in determining the application of the reasonable person standard?
a. Physical disability.
b. Superior skill or knowledge.
c. Emergency circumstances.
d. All of the above are considered.
ANSWER: d
POINTS: 1
60. The rule which permits the jury to infer both negligent conduct and causation from the mere occurrence of certain
events is:
a. proximate cause.
c. causation in fact.
d. comparative negligence.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Easy
61. William, who is a waiter, is injured when an unopened bottle of cola explodes in his hand while he is putting it into the
restaurant's cooler. If William wants to sue the bottling company for his injuries:
a. he will lose, because it will be impossible for him to prove that the bottle was overpressurized by the bottler.
b. he will lose, because the bottling company has no duty to him.
c. he will probably win if the court allows him to use the res ipsa loquitur doctrine.
d. he will win based on the last clear chance rule.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
62. Sarah goes to Marlin's Seafood Restaurant for dinner. The restaurant has a loose tile on the floor near the entry,
which is known to the owner, but not marked. Sarah trips and falls and breaks her arm. Sarah's status with regard
to the store is that of:
a. licensee.
b. business visitor.
c. public invitee.
d. trespasser.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
63. Conduct on the part of the plaintiff which falls below the standard to which he should conform for his own protection
and which cooperates with the negligence of the defendant in bringing about the plaintiff's harm is:
a. comparative negligence.
b. contributory negligence.
c. res ipsa loquitur.
d. voluntary assumption of the risk.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
64. Stella goes to Ranger's Department Store to look for clothes. The store is in the process of remodeling, and there is a
lot of clutter in the aisle. Stella trips over the clutter and breaks her leg. What standard of care does the store have
toward Stella under the circumstances?
a. None, because she came to the store voluntarily.
b. The store owes her a duty of only ordinary care, because she is a trespasser.
c. Because she is a licensee, the store must warn her of hazards of which the store knows but which Stella is
not likely to discover.
d. Because Stella is a business visitor, the store must exercise reasonable care to protect her against dangerous
conditions she is unlikely to discover.
ANSWER: d
POINTS: 1
65. Perry is injured on the job at the factory where he works. He files a workers' compensation claim against his
employer. The liability of the employer under the workers' compensation statute is:
a. comparative.
b. strict.
c. contributory.
d. negligence per se.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
66. The local supermarket has a large glass front door which is well lighted and plainly visible. Nelson, who is new in the
neighborhood, mistook the glass for an open doorway and walked into it, shattering the door and injuring himself. The
store:
a. is strictly liable to Nelson.
b. is not liable to Nelson.
c. is liable under res ipsa loquitur.
d. has no duty to Nelson.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
67. Adam doesn't like having neighborhood teenagers walk across his yard at night. He rigs an animal trap on the path
the teenagers usually use to cross his land. One night, Tim and his friends are walking across the yard when Tim
gets caught in the trap. He is taken to the hospital for his injuries. In this case:
a. Tim is a trespasser on Adam's property, and Adam has the right to use animal traps to strongly discourage
anyone from trespassing.
b. Adam has no duty toward Tim.
c. Adam is not free to inflict intentional injury on a trespasser.
d. All of these.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
68. Seventeen-year-old Todd 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.
a. Todd is engaging in an adult activity and will be held to the same standard as an adult in most of the states.
b. Todd is a minor and will have no responsibility for his torts.
c. Todd's parents are responsible for any torts he commits.
d. Todd is responsible only if he has been driving for more than one year.
ANSWER: a
POINTS: 1
69. In determining the duty of care owed by a defendant using the reasonable person standard, the court will consider all
of the following factors except:
a. The existence of emergency conditions
b. A physician's training and years of experience
c. A person's severe mental retardation
d. Physical disability
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
70. Violation of a statute designed to protect underage, unlicensed drivers, as well as innocent third parties, from the
consequences of juvenile car theft and "joy riding" by prohibiting car owners from leaving the keys in their cars if the
cars are unattended, is likely to be characterized as:
a. negligence per se.
c. contributory negligence.
d. assumption of risk.
ANSWER: a
POINTS: 1
71. The harshness of the contributory negligence doctrine has been mitigated by all of the following except:
a. the last clear chance rule.
b. substitution of the doctrine of comparative negligence.
c. strict liability.
d. None of these.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
72. A form of strict liability applies to all of the following situations except:
a. a lawnmower sold in a defective condition that injures its owner.
b. a fireworks factory that blows up and injures townspeople and their property.
c. a medical procedure.
d. a herd of goats that travel onto a neighbor's property, eating and trampling the neighbor's roses.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
73. Defenses to an action in strict liability include:
a. contributory negligence only.
b. contributory negligence and comparative negligence.
c. comparative negligence only.
d. express assumption of risk under the Third Restatement and, in some states, comparative negligence.
ANSWER: d
POINTS: 1
74. Arthur negligently stopped his car on the highway. Betty, who was driving along, saw Arthur's car in sufficient time
to attempt to stop. However, Betty negligently put her foot on the accelerator instead of the brake and ran into
Arthur's car. If Arthur sues Betty for damages:
a. Arthur's contributory negligence will prevent his recovery from Betty in all jurisdictions.
b. Betty had the last clear chance to avoid the accident and will bear full legal responsibility for it.
c. Arthur has assumed the risk of the accident.
d. because both parties were negligent, in a state that follows the modified comparative negligence doctrine, both
parties will share the liability for their injuries in proportion to their degree of fault unless the court finds
Arthur’s contributory negligence was as great as or greater than Betty’s negligence.
ANSWER: d
POINTS: 1
75. While driving his car five miles over the speed limit, Carl struck Darla, who was jaywalking across the street. Darla
sues and when the case comes to trial, the jury determines that Carl was 60% negligent and that Darla was 40%
negligent. Darla's damages for injuries are $10,000. If this accident occurred in a state following the comparative
negligence theory of recovery, Darla will:
a. recover $10,000.
b. not recover anything.
c. recover $6,000.
d. recover $4,000.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
76. Andrew negligently hit a dog, which lay stunned in the street for a moment and then ran toward Bill, a bystander, and
bit him. In this case:
a. the dog's action is a foreseeable cause of harm.
b. the dog's action is a superseding cause of harm.
c. Andrew will be liable to Bill, because the dog's behavior is a natural consequence of the situation caused by
Andrew's negligence.
d. the dog's owner will be held strictly liable for Bill's injuries, but Andrew will be liable to the dog's owner.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
77. Oscar, who was driving too fast, collided with a truck carrying explosives. The truck was unmarked, so Oscar had
no way of knowing what it contained. The collision caused an explosion, which shattered glass in a building a block
away. The glass injured Ida, who was working inside the building. John, who was walking down the street near the
site of the collision, was seriously burned as a result of the explosion. In this case:
a. Oscar's negligent driving is the proximate cause of Ida's injury.
b. Oscar's negligent driving is the proximate cause of John's injury.
c. both Ida and John are within the zone of danger of the collision.
d. All of these.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
78. In which of the following situations would a landowner NOT have liability to a trespasser?
a. Where the landowner has rigged up a trap to injure anyone coming onto the property without permission.
b. Where a landowner next to a nursery school has an unfenced swimming pool and a trespassing child drowns.
c. Where a trespasser trips over some lawn furniture in an unlighted backyard.
d. The landowner would have liability to a trespasser in all of these situations.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
79. To which of the following does a property owner owe the highest duty of care?
a. A stranded motorist who comes onto the property to seek help
b. A social guest and close friend who have come to the house for a party
c. A client who has come to an accountant's office in a building which the accountant owns
d. A neighbor who comes over uninvited to use a backyard lounge chair
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
80. Which of the following is a defense that a defendant could raise in an action based on strict liability?
a. The plaintiff negligently failed to observe a sign on a highway warning of blasting operations and was injured
from the operations.
b. The owner of a car signed a waiver of potential damages if he parked his vehicle in a blasting zone as a result
of which the car was damaged.
c. A child played with a neighbor's pet raccoon which had escaped from its cage. The child teased the pet and
was bitten.
d. All of these are valid defenses which would be successful if raised by the defendant.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
81. 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 this case:
a. the patient has assumed the risk of wandering onto the railroad tracks.
b. because the patient was contributorily negligent, most states would hold that the railroad has no liability.
c. in states that follow the contributory negligence rule, the train had the last clear chance to avoid the accident,
so the patient’s negligence does not bar his estate’s recovery.
d. the train's striking of the man was an intervening cause, so the railroad company was strictly liable.
ANSWER: c
POINTS: 1
82. In which of the following situations would a court be likely to find an affirmative duty to act?
a. Where a pedestrian witnesses an auto accident in which one of the drivers is injured.
b. Where an airline attendant sees one passenger threaten another passenger.
c. Where the driver of a car sees a two-year-old toddler wandering in the middle of a busy street.
d. All of these are situations where legally there is an affirmative duty to act.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
83. Which of the following statements is true?

a. A plaintiff must prove that the defendant’s negligent conduct proximately caused harm to a legally protected
interest.
b. A defendant has the burden of proof that his negligent conduct did not proximately cause harm.
c. Negligent conduct that is the proximate cause of offensive physical contact results in liability based on social
policy.
d. All of these statements are true.
ANSWER: a
POINTS: 1
84. The duty of a possessor of land to persons who come on the land usually depends on whether those persons are:
a. invitees, trespassers, or licensees.
b. reasonable persons.
c. fiduciaries.
d. involved in abnormally dangerous activities.
ANSWER: a
POINTS: 1
85. Under the Third Restatement of Torts, if the plaintiff is a veterinarian who accepts for treatment a dog from the
defendant:
a. the defendant is strictly liable if the dog is abnormally dangerous and it bites the plaintiff.
b. the plaintiff, if charging a fee, is beyond the scope of strict liability, even if the dog is abnormally dangerous.
c. the doctrine of implied voluntary assumption of risk applies.
d. the defendant is strictly liable for any damage to the plaintiff whether or not the dog is considered abnormally
dangerous.
ANSWER: b
POINTS: 1
86.
a. How does liability based upon negligence differ from liability based upon strict liability?
b. How is liability based upon negligence similar to strict liability?
Liability based upon negligence is liability based upon fault. Negligence involves
conduct that creates an unreasonable risk of harm. Strict liability is liability without
a.
fault. It is not based on the negligence or intent of the defendant but on the nature
ANSWER: of the activity in which he is engaging.
Duties created by engaging in certain activities frequently give rise to liability based
upon negligence. Strict liability is imposed for harm resulting from certain activities
b.
as determined in light of the place, time, and manner in which the activity is
conducted.
POINTS: 1
DIFFICULTY: Challenging
KEYWORDS: Blooms: Synthesis
87. What is the difference between contributory negligence and comparative negligence? Why have so many states
adopted comparative negligence?
ANSWER: Contributory negligence is a plaintiff's failure to exercise reasonable care, which is a

legally contributing cause along with the defendant's negligence in causing the plaintiff's
harm. It is normally a complete bar to the plaintiff's recovery. Comparative negligence is
a more recent doctrine that allows a jury to apportion fault between parties. States have
adopted comparative negligence to avoid the harshness of the contributory negligence
doctrine.
POINTS: 1
88. Define "emergencies" as it affects tort law and explain how a defendant’s negligence creating an emergency affects
liability in the situation.
ANSWER: An emergency in tort law is defined as a sudden and unexpected event that calls for
immediate action and permits no time for deliberation. In determining whether a
defendant’s conduct is reasonable, the law takes into consideration the fact that he was
at the time confronted with a sudden emergency. However, if a defendant's own
negligent or tortious conduct created the emergency, he/she is liable for the
consequences of this conduct even if he/she acted reasonably in the resulting
emergency situation.
POINTS: 1
89. Identify the elements required in an action for negligence.
ANSWER: In an action for negligence, the plaintiff must prove five elements: (a) Duty of care -
that a legal duty required the defendant to meet the standard of conduct set for the
protection of others; (b) Breach of duty - that the defendant did not exercise
reasonable care; (c) Factual cause - that the defendant’s failure to exercise reasonable
care in fact caused the harm the plaintiff sustained; (d) Harm - that the harm that
occurred is of a type protected against negligent conduct; and (e) Scope of liability - that
the harm that occurred is within the scope of liability historically known as proximate
cause.
POINTS: 1
90. What is the reasonable person standard? How is it applied to each of the following?
a. Children
b. Persons with physical disabilities
c. Persons who are mentally retarded
Professional people with advanced degrees and training, such as doctors, lawyers, and
d.
accountants
e. Persons acting in emergency situations
f. Persons who violate statutory duties
ANSWER: The reasonable person is a fictitious individual who is always careful and prudent and
never negligent. The reasonable person standard is external and objective.
Children must conform to the standard of a reasonable person of like age,
a.
intelligence, and experience under like circumstances.
b. The standard is that of a reasonable person under like disability.
A mentally retarded person is held to the standard of conduct of a reasonable
c.
person who is NOT mentally deficient.
Persons who practice a profession are held to the same care and skill normally
d.
possessed by members in good standing of their profession
Emergencies are taken into consideration. The standard of care is that of a
e. reasonable person under the circumstances, and the emergency is considered to be
part of the circumstances.
If the statute is found to be applicable, the majority of courts hold that an
f. unexcused violation is negligence per se; that is, it is conclusively negligent
conduct.
POINTS: 1
91. Think about and then discuss why, in your analysis, the reasonable standard of care differs for the following
categories of individuals: children, persons with physical disabilities, persons with mental disabilities, people with
superior skill or knowledge, people in emergency situations, and those who violate statutory duties. Is there any logic
on which to base these differences because of societal need and expectations? Does justice demand a different
result? Why would the courts make these distinctions?
ANSWER: The courts have not been merely arbitrary in coming to the distinctions. The distinctions
are based on what a reasonable person can expect from such individuals, what usually
occurs in the majority of situations, justice, and the perennial fear the courts have of
being flooded by cases that have no solution.
Children vary in their capabilities, responsibilities, and what their parents will allow
them to do. Third parties dealing with children who may be negligent deserve some
protection. However, minor children cannot be held to the same standards as
a. adults. Generally, the third person is aware of dealing with a child and can respond
accordingly. In the case of a child performing an adult activity, a third person's
expectation can understandably be that the child should behave as a reasonable
adult would.
People who deal with others with physical disabilities are generally put on notice by
the physical appearance of the disabled person that they are indeed dealing with
someone whose physical capabilities will be different from those who are not
physically challenged. Therefore, parties dealing with physically challenged people
b. can react accordingly to protect themselves from harm or at least make
adjustments in their actions. Example: If you left your child at a day care with a
caregiver who was confined to a wheelchair, you would be on notice and assume
the risk that, without taking additional precautions, the provider may not be able to
do some physical activities that may be necessary in some emergencies.
In contrast to the above analysis, the fact that persons are mentally retarded or
otherwise mentally impaired may not be discernible. Therefore, persons dealing
with them may not be on notice of their capabilities. The courts are concerned also
about the floodgates problem: People may use mental impairment as a defense in
c.
the extreme, i.e., "My I.Q. is a few points below what is average for childcare
providers in this country and so I should be excused from all liability," or "I was
under a great deal of stress and suffering from neurosis and so I should have a
lower standard of care ascribed to me."
It would be unjust, a windfall of excusable neglect to ascribe to people with
d.
superior skill or knowledge a standard of care lower than their actual knowledge.
Emergency situations bring to bear their own set of factual circumstances that call
for immediate judgment of the actions involved. It would be unjust to ignore the
e. unique pressures, factual circumstances, and human differences in emergencies
and hold people acting in such situations to the same standard of care as people in
calm, reasonable circumstances.
We are all held to be knowledgeable of the law, whether we are actually aware of
a particular law or not. If we were not, people could use as an excuse that they did
not know of a law. Once again the floodgates problem would raise its head. Also,
courts generally defer to legislative judgment in creating statutes. If the legislature
f. deemed it of societal value to promulgate a particular statute, then the courts are
bound to enforce it. These kinds of statutes are designed to avoid the problems of
proof of standard of care and breach of duty. The harm is either of such a serious
nature or so prevalent that the legislature has seen fit to treat the problem with a
statute.
POINTS: 1
KEYWORDS: Blooms: Evaluation
92. Jack is a trucker who makes his living moving modular homes. This is a dangerous business in that the portions of the
houses once on the truck are wider than the road lanes. Also, Jack frequently has to travel much more slowly than
the other vehicles on the road. One day, Jack, on his way to Atlanta with a modular home in tow, found himself
approaching two trucks coming from the opposite direction with the words “High Museum Exhibits” on the truck
panels. When Jack swerves to avoid a bicyclist, a museum truck runs off the road and tumbles down an
embankment. No one is harmed, but the exhibit being transported is damaged. Discuss the various theories of liability
that might be applied here and why they would be appropriate.
ANSWER: The first question that needs to be addressed is whether the plaintiff would be
successful using the strict liability theory or if simple negligence would be appropriate.
In discussing strict liability the student should articulate that Jack was involved in an
abnormally dangerous activity. The elements of what constitutes an abnormally
dangerous activity would need to be discussed. The student should discuss (a) the high
degree of risk or harm involved and (b) that the activity is not common. In discussing
negligence, the question becomes whether meeting the museum exhibit truck was
foreseeable and whether the museum assumes any risk. The bicyclist may be
discussed in the context of whether he would be considered a superseding cause.
POINTS: 1

Smith and Robersons Business Law 16th Edition Mann Test Bank Download

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Smith and Robersons Business Law 16th Edition Mann Test Bank Download

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Solution Manual for Smith and Robersons Business Law 16th

Edition Mann Roberts 1285428250 9781285428253

30. A social guest is a public invitee.

42. Workers’ compensation is a form of strict liability.

58. Mr. and Mrs. Weaver have a duty to:

83. Which of the following statements is true?

ANSWER: Contributory negligence is a plaintiff's failure to exercise reasonable care, which is a

You might also like