Legal Chapter 12

Front 1

Tort is a French word for “court.”

Back 1

False

Front 2

Tort is a French word for “wrong.”

Back 2

True

Front 3

To commit an intentional tort, one person must intend to harm a certain other person.

Back 3

False

Front 4

To commit an intentional tort, a person must intend to perform an act that causes harm.

Back 4

True

Front 5

Consent is a defense to an allegation of assault, but not battery.

Back 5

False

Front 6

Consent is a defense to an allegation of battery, but not assault.

Back 6

False

Front 7

False imprisonment is a tort only if the confinement or restraint is justified.

Back 7

False

Front 8

False imprisonment occurs when a person is restrained by another intentionally and without justification.

Back 8

True

Front 9

An oral defamatory statement must be communicated to a third party to be actionable

Back 9

True

Front 10

Slander involves the oral communication of defamatory language.

Back 10

True

Front 11

An illegal search can be an invasion of privacy.

Back 11

True

Front 12

Defamation involves wrongfully hurting a person’s good reputation.

Back 12

True

Front 13

Normally, fraud occurs only when there is reliance on a statement of truth.

Back 13

False

Front 14

Puffery is fraud

Back 14

False

Front 15

Unintentionally causing a party to break a contract may constitute wrongful interference with a contractual relationship

Back 15

False

Front 16

Any lawful contract can form the potential basis for an action based on wrongful interference with a contractual relationship

Back 16

True

Front 17

If a person believes that he or she is entitled to certain goods, the tort of conversion cannot occur even if the belief is mistaken

Back 17

False

Front 18

To commit trespass to land, a person must harm the land

Back 18

False

Front 19

If ine persons negligent act harms another, there is no liability unless the actor intended the harm

Back 19

False

Front 20

A failure to return personal property is conversion even if the rigthful owner consented to the initial taking

Back 20

True

Front 21

To determine whether a duty of care has been breached, to support a claim for negligence, a judge asks how he or she would have acted

Back 21

False

Front 22

Publishing false information about another’s product is trade libel.

Back 22

True

Front 23

Business owners have no duty to exercise reasonable care to protect invitees.

Back 23

False

Front 24

If one person’s act harms another, there may be liability for negligence even if the actor did not intend the harm.

Back 24

True

Front 25

If no harm results from an allegedly negligent act, there is no liability.

Back 25

True

Front 26

No one is expected to exercise a reasonable standard of care in every activity.

Back 26

False

Front 27

Under the theory of negligence, the duty of care requires one person to come to the aid of another in “peril.”

Back 27

False

Front 28

To avoid liability for negligence, a business owner must protect its pa¬trons against all risks.

Back 28

False

Front 29

In theory, causation in fact is limitless.

Back 29

True

Front 30

Under the theory of negligence, the duty of care requires one person to aid another who has suffered harm from someone else’s negligence.

Back 30

False

Front 31

Under the theory of negligence, harm must be foreseeable to be considered the proximate cause of an injury.

Back 31

True

Front 32

Liability for negligence requires a finding of causation in fact and a de-termination of proximate cause.

Back 32

True

Front 33

Self-defense is a defense available in an action based on a negligence theory.

Back 33

False

Front 34

An assumption of risk defense does not require that a risk be voluntarily assumed.

Back 34

False

Front 35

Under the doctrine of comparative negligence, both the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s negligence are taken into consideration.

Back 35

True

Front 36

A person assumes any risk that is different from or greater than the risk normally carried by an activity.

Back 36

False

Front 37

Under a social host statute, liability requires proof of negligence.

Back 37

False

Front 38

In a comparative negligence state, if a plaintiff is found to be 30 percent negligent, the award against the defendant will be reduced by 70 percent.

Back 38

False

Front 39

An interactive computer service provider is immune from liability for content on its Web site created by others.

Back 39

True

Front 40

Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to randomly generated e-mail addresses is not illegal.

Back 40

False

Front 41

Bob pushes Carol. Carol falls and breaks her arm. Bob is liable for the injury

Back 41

if Bob intended to push Carol.

Front 42

Louis—larger and stronger than Mica—threatens to hit Mica before hitting and injuring him. Mica files a suit against Louis for assault and battery. Mica will most likely recover for

Back 42

assault and battery

Front 43

Glen falsely accuses Hu of stealing from Island Tours, Inc., their employer. Glen’s statement is defamatory only if

Back 43

a third party hears it

Front 44

Jolie believes that Klute is about to hit her. To prevent harmful contact in this situation, Jolie may use

Back 44

force that is reasonably necessary.

Front 45

Kai files a suit against Lana based on one of Lana’s statements that Kai alleges is fraudulent. To give rise to fraud, the statement must be one of

Back 45

material fact.

Front 46

Ron, the manager of Sav-Mart Discount Store, detains Tina, whom Ron suspects of shoplifting. Tina sues Ron, alleging that the detention was false imprisonment. Ron is liable if Tina

Back 46

was detained for an unreasonably long time.

Front 47

Jim is an appliance salesperson. To make a sale, he asserts that a certain model of a Kitchen Helper refrigerator is the “best one ever made.” This is

Back 47

not fraud.

Front 48

Dru tells his Excel Company coworkers that Fiona, Excel’s office manager, is stealing from their employer. The statement is defamatory only if

Back 48

the statement is false.

Front 49

OK Dry-Cleaning advertises so effectively that the regular customers of its competitor Purity Cleaners patronize OK instead of Purity. This is

Back 49

none of the choices.

Front 50

Lew angrily accuses Meg, a broker with New Financial Services, of fraudulently inducing him to invest in Open Pit Oil Company, whose wells are dry. The reliance that gives rise to liability for fraud is normally based on a statement of

Back 50

fact.

Front 51

Bella owns a farm in Colorado. Doyle drives his sport utility vehicle off a highway and onto Bella’s land. Doyle commits trespass only if he

Back 51

does not have Bella’s permission to drive on the property.

Front 52

Beste Computers, a computer store, takes unethical steps to divert the customers of Cyber Goods, an adjacent competing store. Beste may be liable for

Back 52

wrongful interference with a business relationship

Front 53

As a joke, Fran hides Gary’s business law textbook so that he cannot find it during the week before the exam. Fran is liable for

Back 53

trespass to personal property.

Front 54

Phil invites Quinn onto his land. Quinn commits trespass if

Back 54

Phil asks Quinn to leave and Quinn refuses.

Front 55

Quin, a clerk at PC Computer Store, takes a computer from the store without PC’s permission. Quin is liable for conversion

Back 55

under any circumstances.

Front 56

As a joke, Jem takes Kyla’s business law textbook and hides it so that Kyla cannot find it during the week before the exam. Jem may have committed

Back 56

trespass to personal property.

Front 57

Direct Marketing, Inc., floods the e-mail boxes of the employees of Eagle Products Corporation with unsolicited ads to the extent that the employees cannot e-mail each other. Direct has most likely committed

Back 57

trespass to personal property.

Front 58

Bill enters onto Cindy’s property to help Dora, who is in danger. Cindy charges Bill with trespass to land. Bill has

Back 58

a complete defense.

Front 59

In newspaper ads, Little Used Autos falsely accuses Mighty Value Vehicles, a competitor, of selling stolen cars. Mighty’s sales decrease. Little has most likely committed

Back 59

slander of title.

Front 60

Fred files a suit against Gail for conversion of property that Fred asserts he owns. Gail will not be liable if she can show that

Back 60

Fred has no interest in the property.

Front 61

Bette backs out of City Parking Garage, colliding with Dill’s car. Dill may recover $7,500 to cover the cost of the repairs if Bette failed to act as

Back 61

a reasonable person.

Front 62

City Times, a newspaper, knowingly publishes an article falsely stating that the inventory of Walco, a discount store, consists of stolen goods. City Times is liable for

Back 62

slander of title.

Front 63

Roy owns a building in which Shelly rents an apartment. The sidewalks around the building are in poor repair. Many sections have buckled from the growth of tree roots over the years.

Refer to Fact Pattern 12–A1. As the owner of the building, Roy has a duty to

Back 63

repair the sidewalks.

Front 64

Roy owns a building in which Shelly rents an apartment. The sidewalks around the building are in poor repair. Many sections have buckled from the growth of tree roots over the years.

Refer to Fact Pattern 12–A1. As a tenant in the building, Shelly has a duty to

Back 64

do nothing.

Front 65

Dependable Appliances, a retail store, must use reasonable care on its premises to warn its patrons of

Back 65

hidden risks.

Front 66

Ira shops in a Jolly Mart store, whose employee Kris recently mopped the floor. Ira slips, falls, and suffers an injury. Jolly is liable to Ira on a negligence theory if there was

Back 66

no “Wet Floor” warning sign.

Front 67

Caleb is driving a car in which Dona is a passenger when an accident occurs. Caleb and Dona are emotionally rattled, but neither is physically hurt. Caleb is not liable to Dona on a negligence theory because

Back 67

Dona was not injured.

Front 68

To protect its customers and other business invitees, Sav-Mart Grocery Stores Corporation must warn them of

Back 68

concealed dangers.

Front 69

instead of troponin, what serves as the intermediary between actin and tropomyosin in smooth muscle?

Back 69

Caldesmon

Front 70

While boating, Phil ignores warning signs that the weather is worsening. His boat is swamped. Quick Sea Rescue’s recovery of Phil is slowed by an inexperienced crewman. Meanwhile Rita, who is also in a floundering craft awaiting rescue, is lost. In Rita’s family’s suit against Phil, his failure to heed the signs of the approaching storm will most likely be held

Back 70

the causation in fact, but not the proximate cause of Rita’s loss.

Front 71

Joe sees Karo floundering in Lake Rough Waters. Joe is liable on the ground of negligence

Back 71

under no circumstances.

Front 72

Lana hires Mike, an architect, to design a warehouse. Lana is dissatis¬fied with the look of the new building and sues Mike, alleging negligence. Mike can successfully defend against the suit by proving that

Back 72

Lana was not injured in any way.

Front 73

Ralph, a van driver for Standard Delivery Company, causes a multi-vehicle accident on a city street. Ralph and Standard are liable to

Back 73

only those whose injuries could have been reasonably foreseen.

Front 74

Marie, a driver for National Transport Company, causes a five-car acci¬dent on an interstate highway. Marie and National are liable to

Back 74

only those whose injuries could reasonably have been foreseen.

Front 75

Edie is injured when she is struck by debris from an explosion at Finest Fireworks Factory. The rule that harm must be foreseeable to constitute the proximate cause of an injury under a negligence theory was established in

Back 75

Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co.

Front 76

Nico is a passenger in a car driven by Owen, whose negligence causes an accident, injuring himself. Nico, uninjured, accompanies Owen to Parkside Hospital in an ambulance. The ambulance is hit by a car driven by Quin, injuring Nico. Nico files a suit against Owen, whose best defense is

Back 76

superseding cause.

Front 77

Beth is injured in a car accident with Cal, whom she sues, alleging negligence. Cal claims that Beth was driving more carelessly than he was. Comparative negligence may reduce Beth’s recovery

Back 77

even if Beth was only slightly at fault.

Front 78

Super Tool Company makes tools for consumers and construction professionals. While using a Super tool to replace an electrical outlet, Tom neglects to shut off the power and is electrocuted. Against a suit filed by Tom’s heirs, Super’s best defense is

Back 78

contributory negligence.

Front 79

An Iowa state statute requires amusement parks to maintain equipment in specific condition for the protection of patrons. Jack’s Fun Park fails to maintain its equipment. Key, a patron, is injured. Jack’s has committed

Back 79

negligence per se.

Front 80

George has a badly infected right foot. Herb, George’s physician, prescribes amputation. George agrees. During the operation, Herb amputates the left foot. In George’s suit against Herb, George’s best theory for recovery is

Back 80

res ipsa loquitur.