MGMT 200 ACTUAL 2026 study GUIDE QUESTIONS AND
SOLUTIONS RATED A+
✔✔Defenses to negligence - statute of limitations - ✔✔the time period allotted for the
injured party to file a lawsuit; varies by state and situation; pre-trial motion; if proven,
complete bar to action (exception: discovery rule)
✔✔Defenses to negligence - failure to mitigate damages - ✔✔plaintiff has a duty to
mitigate damages; for ex: seek treatment for medical injuries (affirmative duty, can be
seen as intervening act/cause)
✔✔Basic defenses - ✔✔Trial/pre-trial mechanism. Denial defense, statute of limitations,
failure to mitigate damages.
✔✔Affirmative defenses - ✔✔Look at plaintiff's conduct. Contributory negligence,
comparative negligence, assumption of risk.
✔✔Defenses to negligence - contributory negligence - ✔✔Plaintiff's conduct was a
contributing factor in their own injury; complete bar to recovery, even if 1% at fault
✔✔Defenses to negligence - comparative negligence - ✔✔Compares the negligence of
plaintiff and defendant and apportions damages accordingly. Pure comparative:
plaintiff's recovery reduced by the amt they are at fault, can recover 30% even if 70% at
fault. Modified (majority of states): plaintiff can only recover if their negligence was equal
to or less than defendant's negligence; more than 50% at fault, can't recover
✔✔Defenses to negligence - assumption of risk - ✔✔If plaintiff assumed risk of injury,
they can't recover. Express (contractual): prior to defendant's negligence, plaintiff
assumed the risk of injury by signing a release. Implied (subjective): no express
oral/written release (plaintiff knew the risk and voluntarily assumed it).
✔✔Strict liability - ✔✔the imposition of absolute liability on a defendant w/o a finding of
fault (such as tortious intent or negligence). Plaintiff need only prove that the tort
occurred and that the defendant was responsible.
✔✔Products liability - ✔✔Refers to a manufacturer or seller being held liable for placing
a defective product into the hands of a consumer
✔✔Products liability theories - ✔✔Strict products liability, negligence, express warranty,
implied warranty
✔✔Products liability approach - ✔✔1) proper damages 2) proper parties 3) standard 4)
causation 5) damages
, ✔✔Products liability theories- strict products liability - ✔✔A commercial supplier places
a product in the stream of commerce in an unreasonably dangerous defective condition
which causes damages. Damages: personal injury/property damage. Parties: anyone in
supply chain (not private sellers) and buyer/user/foreseeable bystander. Standard:
unreasonably dangerous defective product (defect: manufacturing (comes out of factory
wrong), design (risk benefit test: do risks outweigh benefit of product + consumer
expectation test: is product dangerous beyond expectations of ordinary consumer),
warning (duty to warn of foreseeable significant risks at time of manufacture)).
✔✔Products liability theories- negligence - ✔✔A defective product is not enough, must
show a breach (some unreasonable conduct) that led to the injury. Limited to the
behavior -> supply chain is not automatic. Damages: personal injury/property damage.
Parties: anyone in supply chain who breached duty (also private sellers, repairers) and
all foreseeable Ps. Standard: reasonable care under the circumstances. Ex: selling
used car with broken brakes, could be sued for negligence (not strict products bc i am
not a manufacturer or retailer).
✔✔Products liability theories- express warranty - ✔✔Statement about the
safety/functionality of product that is not true and causes injury. Damages: personal
injury/property damage and pure economic loss. Parties: anyone who makes the
warranty and foreseeable P who relies on statement. Standard: set by explicit
statement; failure to conform to warranty leads to injury and liability.
✔✔Products liability theories- implied warranty - ✔✔Of merchantability OR fitness for a
particular purpose. Damages: personal injury/property damage & pure economic loss.
Parties: seller and purchaser. Standard: set by warranty-1) Merchantability: fit for avg
purpose intended at time sold (cheeseburger, functioning car). 2) Fitness for a particular
purpose: implicitly warranted for (cold weather sleeping bag). .
✔✔Contract formation - ✔✔Under common law and sale of goods contract: 1) Offer
(can have termination, revocation, or rejection here) 2) acceptance 3) consideration 4)
defenses
✔✔Was there a valid offer? - ✔✔requires intent to be bound, must be definite in terms,
must be communicated to offeree
✔✔Termination of offer - ✔✔Gen: offers are freely terminable prior to acceptance.
Exceptions: option contract: offer open for a reasonable time or specific time stated,
detrimental reliance by offeree in bilateral K: option K enforced to extent necessary to
avoid injustice
✔✔Revocation of offer - ✔✔Express revocation to offeree before acceptance.
✔✔Rejection by offeree - ✔✔Cannot later accept. Conduct: express/implied.
SOLUTIONS RATED A+
✔✔Defenses to negligence - statute of limitations - ✔✔the time period allotted for the
injured party to file a lawsuit; varies by state and situation; pre-trial motion; if proven,
complete bar to action (exception: discovery rule)
✔✔Defenses to negligence - failure to mitigate damages - ✔✔plaintiff has a duty to
mitigate damages; for ex: seek treatment for medical injuries (affirmative duty, can be
seen as intervening act/cause)
✔✔Basic defenses - ✔✔Trial/pre-trial mechanism. Denial defense, statute of limitations,
failure to mitigate damages.
✔✔Affirmative defenses - ✔✔Look at plaintiff's conduct. Contributory negligence,
comparative negligence, assumption of risk.
✔✔Defenses to negligence - contributory negligence - ✔✔Plaintiff's conduct was a
contributing factor in their own injury; complete bar to recovery, even if 1% at fault
✔✔Defenses to negligence - comparative negligence - ✔✔Compares the negligence of
plaintiff and defendant and apportions damages accordingly. Pure comparative:
plaintiff's recovery reduced by the amt they are at fault, can recover 30% even if 70% at
fault. Modified (majority of states): plaintiff can only recover if their negligence was equal
to or less than defendant's negligence; more than 50% at fault, can't recover
✔✔Defenses to negligence - assumption of risk - ✔✔If plaintiff assumed risk of injury,
they can't recover. Express (contractual): prior to defendant's negligence, plaintiff
assumed the risk of injury by signing a release. Implied (subjective): no express
oral/written release (plaintiff knew the risk and voluntarily assumed it).
✔✔Strict liability - ✔✔the imposition of absolute liability on a defendant w/o a finding of
fault (such as tortious intent or negligence). Plaintiff need only prove that the tort
occurred and that the defendant was responsible.
✔✔Products liability - ✔✔Refers to a manufacturer or seller being held liable for placing
a defective product into the hands of a consumer
✔✔Products liability theories - ✔✔Strict products liability, negligence, express warranty,
implied warranty
✔✔Products liability approach - ✔✔1) proper damages 2) proper parties 3) standard 4)
causation 5) damages
, ✔✔Products liability theories- strict products liability - ✔✔A commercial supplier places
a product in the stream of commerce in an unreasonably dangerous defective condition
which causes damages. Damages: personal injury/property damage. Parties: anyone in
supply chain (not private sellers) and buyer/user/foreseeable bystander. Standard:
unreasonably dangerous defective product (defect: manufacturing (comes out of factory
wrong), design (risk benefit test: do risks outweigh benefit of product + consumer
expectation test: is product dangerous beyond expectations of ordinary consumer),
warning (duty to warn of foreseeable significant risks at time of manufacture)).
✔✔Products liability theories- negligence - ✔✔A defective product is not enough, must
show a breach (some unreasonable conduct) that led to the injury. Limited to the
behavior -> supply chain is not automatic. Damages: personal injury/property damage.
Parties: anyone in supply chain who breached duty (also private sellers, repairers) and
all foreseeable Ps. Standard: reasonable care under the circumstances. Ex: selling
used car with broken brakes, could be sued for negligence (not strict products bc i am
not a manufacturer or retailer).
✔✔Products liability theories- express warranty - ✔✔Statement about the
safety/functionality of product that is not true and causes injury. Damages: personal
injury/property damage and pure economic loss. Parties: anyone who makes the
warranty and foreseeable P who relies on statement. Standard: set by explicit
statement; failure to conform to warranty leads to injury and liability.
✔✔Products liability theories- implied warranty - ✔✔Of merchantability OR fitness for a
particular purpose. Damages: personal injury/property damage & pure economic loss.
Parties: seller and purchaser. Standard: set by warranty-1) Merchantability: fit for avg
purpose intended at time sold (cheeseburger, functioning car). 2) Fitness for a particular
purpose: implicitly warranted for (cold weather sleeping bag). .
✔✔Contract formation - ✔✔Under common law and sale of goods contract: 1) Offer
(can have termination, revocation, or rejection here) 2) acceptance 3) consideration 4)
defenses
✔✔Was there a valid offer? - ✔✔requires intent to be bound, must be definite in terms,
must be communicated to offeree
✔✔Termination of offer - ✔✔Gen: offers are freely terminable prior to acceptance.
Exceptions: option contract: offer open for a reasonable time or specific time stated,
detrimental reliance by offeree in bilateral K: option K enforced to extent necessary to
avoid injustice
✔✔Revocation of offer - ✔✔Express revocation to offeree before acceptance.
✔✔Rejection by offeree - ✔✔Cannot later accept. Conduct: express/implied.
