A) assumption of the risk
B) contributory negligence
C) res ipsa loquitur
D) comparative negligence
E) Good Samaritan statutes
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Negligence
B) A strict liability offense
C) A res ipsa loquitur offense
D) A tort directly involving negligence per se
E) Gross negligence
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) malpractice by a company to a customer.
B) addressing the issue of proximate cause in a negligence case.
C) issuing the standards of care for companies to customers.
D) assessing damages in a negligence case for customers.
E) addressing what a breach of duty is by a company for their customers.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Res ipsa loquitur.
B) Negligence per se.
C) Statutory shop act.
D) Comparative negligence.
E) Assumption of the risk.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The court ruled that under contributive negligence principles, Swigart was entitled to recover.
B) The court ruled that under pure comparative negligence principles, Swigart was entitled to recover.
C) The court ruled that under modified comparative negligence principles, Swigart was entitled to recover.
D) The court ruled that Swigart was entitled to recover damages, however, remanded the case to determine whether or not Swigart was really injured.
E) The court ruled that the assumption of risk doctrine applies to Swigart's claims and he could therefore not recover.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Pure negligence.
B) Strict liability.
C) Res ipsa loquitur.
D) Negligence per se.
E) Danger invites rescue doctrine.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Compensatory.
B) Punitive.
C) Nominal.
D) Exemplary.
E) Quantum.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The standard of care a reasonable person owes to another.
B) A failure to live up to the standard of care a reasonable person owes to others.
C) Actual harm or cause in fact which results from a failure to live up to a standard of care.
D) Legal cause or the extent to which the defendant is held responsible for actions which fall short of the standard of care.
E) A compensable loss suffered by the plaintiff.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied.
B) That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply because there was insufficient proof that the type of accident at issue would not normally happen in the absence of negligence.
C) That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply because there was insufficient proof that the dock at issue was in the exclusive control of the defendants.
D) That the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply because it only applies in contract cases.
E) That whether or not the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied should be decided by the jury.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Reasonable person
B) Above-average person
C) Without error
D) Perfect accountability
E) Reasonable accountability
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 81 - 90 of 90
Related Exams