Reference no: EM13471247
1. You hire Frank to make deliveries for your office supply business. Frank has a history of driving while intoxicated, but he didn't reveal his driving history to you when applying for the job. Thus, you had no way of knowing that he was dangerous on the roads. After a week in your employment, he drunkenly crashes the company van into a legally parked car while making his deliveries. Which one of the following statements is correct?
A. You were reasonably careful in hiring Frank and had no reason to suspect the danger he posed. Because you weren't negligent, you can't be held liable for
Frank's negligence.
B. You can be held liable for Frank's negligence under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
C. You can be held liable for Frank's actions under the doctrine of respondeat superior or vicarious liability.
D. Because Frank had the accident while acting as an employee, only you as his employer- not Frank personally-can be held liable for negligence.
2. In the preceding question, imagine that the plaintiff's car, which Frank struck, was illegally parked-it was sticking out too far into the street, and the parking meter had expired. If Frank hadn't been drunk, he probably could have avoided hitting the car. However, the careless way the car was parked did help cause the accident. Which one of the following statements is correct?
A. Frank could raise the defense of comparative negligence, depending on the jurisdiction. In most provinces, the effect of this defense would simply be to lessen the award to the owner of the parked car by the percentage he was responsible for the accident.
B. The defense of assumption of risk is Frank's best bet.
C. Frank could raise the defense of the plaintiff's negligence. In most provinces, if the plaintiff's negligence was partly to blame for the injury, the plaintiff can't recover anything.
D. By failing to put money in the parking meter, the plaintiff violated a statute and is liable under the doctrine of negligence per se.
3. Which one of the following is not an element of strict liability?
A. Defective product C. Buyer suffers physical injury
B. Seller sells to buyer D. With intent to mislead buyer
4. A neighbor's tree branch partially broke in an ice storm two months ago. Ever since the storm, the branch strikes your window whenever the wind blows. Since the neighbor is vacationing in Florida for three months, you decide to saw the branch yourself. In the event of a lawsuit, your defense will be
A. privilege to abate a nuisance. C. failure to investigate.
B. defense of property. D. contributory negligence.
5. You're seen running from a jewelry store that has just been robbed. The jeweler gives chase and just as he catches up with you, you throw a bag into the river. The jeweler performs a citizen's arrest and holds you until the police arrive. Because the bag in the river was never found, at trial you're declared "not guilty." You now decide to sue the jeweler. What is the likely outcome?
A. You lose. There's no tort that protects people from being confined unfairly.
B. You win because there was no basis to suspect you of stealing.
C. You lose because your detention was reasonable. There was a real basis for suspecting that you committed the crime.
D. You lose. Shop owners can hold anyone they want if they suspect them of stealing. Reasonable suspicion isn't needed.
6. A radio station plays a commercial for Beefy's restaurant. The station created the commercial by editing the voice of a famous movie star from a recent movie to make it sound like the star loved Beefy's. The star didn't give permission for this commercial and has never even been to Beefy's. Which one of the following statements is correct?
A. The star is guilty of negligent misrepresentation, although not intentional misrepresentation.
B. The radio station is guilty of appropriation.
C. The radio station is guilty of slandering the restaurant.
D. The radio station is guilty of negligence.
7. The elements of negligence may be best summarized as
A. never causing injury to anyone.
B. the duty to avoid reckless behavior, breach of that duty causing harm to the plaintiff.
C. duty to act with care, breach of that duty by defendant causing damage.
D. duty to act with care, in light of the subjective standard of who you are, breaching that duty and causing the plaintiff damage.
8. You're a sports agent. A recently graduated basketball player headed for the big time signs a contract with Jack, another agent.You get the basketball player alone and convince her to break the contract and hire you as her agent.You did this by saying horrible things about Jack, some of which were true. Which one of the following statements is correct?
A. Jack can sue the basketball player for libel.
B. Jack can sue you for breach of contract.
C. Jack can sue the basketball player for interference with contract.
D. Jack can sue you for interference with contract.
9. In most invasion of privacy torts,
A. public figures who sue media defendants must show a higher level of misbehavior by the defendant than private persons.
B. public figures and private persons are treated the same way under common law.
C. private persons who sue media defendants must show a higher level of misbehavior by the defendant than public figures.
D. Most provinces have abolished invasion of privacy torts.
10. Which one of the following is an example of a fiduciary?
A. Buyer C. Seller
B. Doctor D. Plaintiff