Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
15 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
William is driving 45 MPH in a 35 MPH zone at night without his headlights on. He runs into
Clinton who is out for a nighttime jog. Since William was breaking the law, this case would fall into the category of “______ .” |
Negligence Per Se
|
Traffic violations, building code violations, and physicians that do not provide emergency care to patients in need are all examples of “negligence per se” violations.
Negligence per se lawsuits are based on the fact that the defendant violated a law and an injury occurred as a result of that violation. The plaintiff only needs to show that the negligence caused the injury and that damages occurred. |
|
|
Bryant points an unloaded gun at Melissa and yells “I am going to kill you!” Melissa, who has reason to believe that she is in immediate danger, feels threatened. This is an example of the intentional ________ .
|
Tort of Assault
|
To be considered assault, words (i.e. “I am going to kill you”) must be accompanied by a threatening action (i.e. raised fist or pointed gun).
In criminal law, "assault and battery" are normally components of one offense. However in tort law, these are separate offenses: Assault – threatening words accompanied with a threatening action that causes someone to believe they are in immediate danger. Battery – wrongful touching of an individual (whether or not it causes harm). |
|
|
Brian, a 13 year-old, decides to shoot Justin with his pellet gun. The pellet hits Justin in the eye causing him great pain. What will the court decide?
___ Brian is liable for battery ___ Brian is liable for an intentional tort ___ Brian is liable for an intentional tort (battery) and negligence ___ Since Brian is a minor, his parents are liable ___ Because he is a minor, Brian is not liable |
Brian is liable for an intentional tort (battery) and negligence
|
Normally, a court will not hold parents liable for a minor’s actions. In this case, the action was clearlyan intentional tort and negligence and even minors can be held accountable for their actions. However, with minors, the “reasonable person” standard is adjusted to reflect their age.
|
|
|
Rachel, an excellent car detailer, waxes Scott’s car for him while he is sleeping in. Scott and Rachel had never discussed her waxing his car and no promises were exchanged. Rachel sues Scott for a payment of $250 in small claims court. What will a judge most likely decide?
___ Since there was no written contract, Scott will not owe Rachel the money. ___ Scott is benefitting and owes the money. ___ Scott is not liable. The waxing of the car will be construed as a gift. ___ Promissory estoppel requires Scott to pay Rachel. ___ Waxing a car is not a customary gift – Scott owes Rachel the money |
Scott is not liable. The waxing of the car will be construed as a gift.
|
There is nothing to suggest that promises were exchanged between Scott and Rachel.
|
|
|
Andy, who owns Limos2U, was having a difficult time finding limo drivers. As a result, Andy hired a driver (Donnie) who Andy knew had two previous DUIs to drive limos for Limos2U. Three weeks later Donnie hit a child while driving drunk on the job. The doctrine of respondeat superior applies and the court will hold Andy ___________ .
|
Directly Responsible
|
Respondeat superior is a type of vicarious liability. Vicarious liability – A type of liability where one person is liable for the torts of another person. Normally, a principal (owner) is not liable for the intentional torts of his agents (employees).
The respondeat superior doctrine states that an employer is normally liable for torts, contracts, or misrepresentations that an employee commits in the scope of his employment. Since he improperly and negligently hired Donnie, Andy is directly responsible. Owner is directly responsible if ANY of the following are present: 1 – Owner gives employee improper instructions that caused tort 2 – Owner improperly or negligently chooses an employee 3 – Owner fails to properly supervise employee’s work when there was a duty |
|
|
Max, who owns Papa Papa’s pizza, hired Michael to deliver pizzas for his restaurant. After delivering his last pizza, but while he was still clocked in, Michael decided to stop by O’Sullivan’s Pub to celebrate Saint Patrick’s Day properly (with a few brews) without permission from Max. After drinking a few beers, Michael was in a hurry to get back to work and backed into someone else’s vehicle. In this situation, respondeat superior will not apply because of the doctrine of _______ .
|
Frolic and Detour
|
The doctrine of frolic and detour relieves the principal (owner) from liability when the actions occurred during a substantial deviation from the employee’s business obligations or geographically have detoured greatly from where they should be.
|
|
|
Merky Pharmaceutical recently produced a swine flu immunization that was administered to hundreds of thousands of people. Blake, who received the vaccine, suffered paralysis that doctors believe was due to the vaccine. Which of the following apply to Blake’s case?
___ res ipsa loquitur ___ strict liability ___ prima facie ___ breach of warranty of merchantability ___ all of these |
All of these
|
Prima Facie – “at first sight” sufficient evidence for a trial
Res Ipsa Loquitur – “the thing speaks for itself” the damages prove negligence occurred Breach of Warranty of merchantability – warrants the good is fit for the ordinary purpose Strict Liability – imposes liability on the manufacturer as a matter of public policy |
|
|
When a judge overturns a jury’s verdict, it is known as a judgment _______. This outcome is extremely rare and is based on the judge finding that there was insufficient evidence to warrant the jury’s conclusion. At that time, the judge enters a judgment for the other side.
|
N.O.V.
|
Judgement N.O.V., which stands for judgment non obstante veredicto, means judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
|
|
|
Max, the owner of Papa Papa’s pizza, hired Carol to deliver pizzas for his restaurant. While Carol is delivering pizzas, she accidentally runs a stop sign and hits another vehicle. In this case, the doctrine of ________ will apply.
|
Respondeat Superior
|
Vicarious liability – A type of liability where one person is liable for the torts of another person. Anytime an agent (i.e. employee) of a principal (i.e. owner) is acting in the normal scope of employment the doctrine of respondeat superior will hold the principal liable for the tortuous acts of the agent. Normally, a principal (owner) is not liable for the intentional torts of his agents (employees). Respondeat superior is a type of vicarious liability.
|
|
|
Matt, a homeowner, was fixing an exterior electrical outlet and needed to go to the hardware store for parts. Taking every precaution, he stacked boxes in front of the outlet and locked the fence to his backyard. While he was gone, a neighbor’s child named Laura jumped the fence, moved the boxes, touched the wires, and was electrocuted. Laura’s parents want to sue Matt for negligence. A jury determines if negligence occurred, they are going to compare Matt to the “ _________” standard.
|
Reasonable Person
|
In the above example, the jury will probably determine that Matt acted “reasonably.” The “reasonable person” standard requires that each member of society act in a prudent manner exercising reasonable caution.
|
|
|
Becky is a professional artist who makes collages for a living. Her specialty is making collages using 5% of Ansel Adam's black and white Yosemite pictures and 95% of her own black and white photos. Even though Becky credits Ansel Adam for the photography, Ansel Adam's estate decides to sue Becky. Becky's best defense is the
|
Fair Use
|
The fair use doctrine allows artists and authors to use small portions of other artists or authors work. Becky will most likely win since she did not negatively affect Ansel Adam’s copyrighted images’ value, the nature of the copyrighted work, and she only used his pictures for 5% of the whole collage.
|
|
|
Bethany yelled “bomb” in a crowded shopping mall the day after Thanksgiving. A man that was trampled in the mass exodus of shoppers decides to sue Bethany. The judge will most likely rule Bethany is liable because her speech represents a “_________".
|
Clear and Present Danger"
|
The classic example of “clear and present danger” is yelling “Fire!” in a crowded movie theater. First Amendment rights do not protect someone who abuses these rights to incite violence or other significantly negative consequences.
|
|
|
Stephanie bought a jar of Unplanters Peanuts at the grocery store. While driving home, she grabbed a handful of the peanuts and chomped down on them. Unbeknownst to her, a piece of gravel had fallen in the jar of peanuts at the factory. Several of Stephanie’s teeth were chipped and she wants to sue Unplanters Peanuts for damages. Her lawsuit will be on the grounds of breaching the _________.
|
Implied Warranty of Merchantability
|
Since sellers are normally better suited than buyers to determine if a product will perform properly, the implied warranty of merchantability shifts the cost of nonperformance from the buyer to the seller. Express warranty – the jar of peanuts has 16oz of peanuts that are fresh until December. Implied warranty of merchantability – the jar of peanuts is not going to have a rock in it.
|
|
|
While breaking the speed limit, Daniel ran a stop sign and collided with a truck carrying dynamite. The truck carrying dynamite exploded and rained debris on a man walking his dog six blocks away. The man, who was hospitalized with injuries, files a lawsuit against Daniel.
__________ , which limits a defendant’s liability to the damages that are reasonably foreseeable and that are a natural and probable consequence of the breach of duty, should help Daniel’s case. |
Proximate Cause
|
Proximate cause, which could more accurately called “scope of liability,” limits the liability of a negligent action to consequences that are reasonably related to the defendant’s negligent action. Courts typically encourage jurors to determine if the outcome was “natural and probable.” Obviously, the outcome of Daniel’s speeding was not “natural or probable” and the case would most likely be thrown out. Another way to examine proximate cause – Was the damage to the plaintiff foreseeable?
With a negligent tort, the plaintiff must: 1 – Show there was a duty owed 2 – Show that the duty was breached 3 – Prove that the breach was the “proximate cause” 4 – Show that damages were suffered |
|
|
Mike did not want you to enter to a partnership with Amber and intentionally told her these lies about you. Mike falsely told Amber a potential investor/business partner that you had not fulfilled previous contracts with him. You should sue Mike for __________.
|
Slander
|
Slander - which is spoken, is a false statement that was intended to harm a person's reputation. In order to win a slander lawsuit, you must prove that financial losses occurred. A slander lawsuit you can only sue for the financial loss (not the damages to your reputation).
Libel – any permanent recorded defamation (written or photographic) Defamation – is the broad term (applies to both libel and slander) that describes a false communication by the defendant to a third party that harms the plaintiff’s reputation |
