BA 358 Exam 2 Questions With Verified Answers
1. Why is it more difficult to prove guilt in a criminal prosecution as opposed to a civil
action in tort?
a. Need to prove a duty of care existed in tort
b. Strict liability takes away the need to prove intention
c. Mostly need to prove intention in a criminal case
d. A careless act which harms another in negligence - ANSWER c. Mostly need to prove
intention in a criminal case
2. Ann kisses her husband Brian goodbye as he prepared to go to work on his
motorcycle. Ann steps back and is immediately horrified to see Brian knocked from his
motorcycle by he negligent driving of Charles, who crashes his car into Brian's
motorcycle. Danielle, a pedestrian passing by on the other side of the street, witnesses
the accident, too. Brian suffers horrific injuries. Both Ann and Danielle suffer acute
distress and recurring psychological problems as a result of witnessing the accident.
What would the likely outcome be if Ann and Danielle sued Charles in a state that uses
the traditional "impact" rule to determine liability in cases of negligent infliction of
emotional harm?
a. Ann and Danielle would both win
b. Ann would win but Danielle would lose
c. Ann would lose but Danielle would win
d. Ann and Danielle would both lose - ANSWER d. Ann and Danielle would both lose
3. Which of the following is correct?
a. Slander and slander per se have the same elements to establish the cause of action
b. Libel and slander per se have the same elements to establish the cause of action
c. Slander requires proof of punitive damages
d. Libel and slander per se do not require proof of actual damages - ANSWER d. Libel
and slander per se do not require proof of actual damages
4. Which of the following is correct?
a. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of extreme and outrageous
conduct that causes great bodily harm
, b. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of actual causation
c. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of physical impact
d. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of zone of danger - ANSWER
b. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of actual causation
5. Which of the following is not a subset cause of action for Privacy?
a. Intrusion
b. Misappropriation of Likeness
c. Evasion of truth under oath
d. Public Disclosure of Private Facts - ANSWER c. Evasion of truth under oath
6. Aaron is the punter on his high school football team. Biff, one of the players on the
opposing team, runs into Aaron as he is punting the ball. Aaron is injured. Biff's team is
penalized 15 yards for roughing the kicker. Which of the following most accurately
states the likely outcome if Aaron sues Biff in the tort of Battery?
a. Aaron's action will fail because he must be taken to have consented to physical
contact, even rough physical contact, by agreeing to play football
b. Aaron's action will succeed because Biff's contact with him was forbidden by the
rules of the game
c. Although Biff's contact with Aaron was outside the rules of the game, Aaron must be
taken to have consented to it because it was within the range of ordinary contact to be
expected in a game
d. Aaron's action will succeed because he did not consent to contact that was not
permitted by the rules of the game - ANSWER c. Although Biff's contact with Aaron was
outside the rules of the game, Aaron must be taken to have consented to it because it
was within the range of ordinary contact to be expected in a game
7. In order to establish the tort of assault, what type of apprehension must the plaintiff
prove that he or she has as a result of the defendant's conduct?
a. Well-founded apprehension of imminent contact by the defendant that would amount
to battery.
b. Acute personal apprehension of imminent contact by the defendant that would
amount to battery - ANSWER a. Well-founded apprehension of imminent contact by the
defendant that would amount to battery.
8. Which of the following must the plaintiff prove as element(s) for the tort of battery?
a. That the defendant intended to injure the plaintiff
1. Why is it more difficult to prove guilt in a criminal prosecution as opposed to a civil
action in tort?
a. Need to prove a duty of care existed in tort
b. Strict liability takes away the need to prove intention
c. Mostly need to prove intention in a criminal case
d. A careless act which harms another in negligence - ANSWER c. Mostly need to prove
intention in a criminal case
2. Ann kisses her husband Brian goodbye as he prepared to go to work on his
motorcycle. Ann steps back and is immediately horrified to see Brian knocked from his
motorcycle by he negligent driving of Charles, who crashes his car into Brian's
motorcycle. Danielle, a pedestrian passing by on the other side of the street, witnesses
the accident, too. Brian suffers horrific injuries. Both Ann and Danielle suffer acute
distress and recurring psychological problems as a result of witnessing the accident.
What would the likely outcome be if Ann and Danielle sued Charles in a state that uses
the traditional "impact" rule to determine liability in cases of negligent infliction of
emotional harm?
a. Ann and Danielle would both win
b. Ann would win but Danielle would lose
c. Ann would lose but Danielle would win
d. Ann and Danielle would both lose - ANSWER d. Ann and Danielle would both lose
3. Which of the following is correct?
a. Slander and slander per se have the same elements to establish the cause of action
b. Libel and slander per se have the same elements to establish the cause of action
c. Slander requires proof of punitive damages
d. Libel and slander per se do not require proof of actual damages - ANSWER d. Libel
and slander per se do not require proof of actual damages
4. Which of the following is correct?
a. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of extreme and outrageous
conduct that causes great bodily harm
, b. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of actual causation
c. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of physical impact
d. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of zone of danger - ANSWER
b. Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires proof of actual causation
5. Which of the following is not a subset cause of action for Privacy?
a. Intrusion
b. Misappropriation of Likeness
c. Evasion of truth under oath
d. Public Disclosure of Private Facts - ANSWER c. Evasion of truth under oath
6. Aaron is the punter on his high school football team. Biff, one of the players on the
opposing team, runs into Aaron as he is punting the ball. Aaron is injured. Biff's team is
penalized 15 yards for roughing the kicker. Which of the following most accurately
states the likely outcome if Aaron sues Biff in the tort of Battery?
a. Aaron's action will fail because he must be taken to have consented to physical
contact, even rough physical contact, by agreeing to play football
b. Aaron's action will succeed because Biff's contact with him was forbidden by the
rules of the game
c. Although Biff's contact with Aaron was outside the rules of the game, Aaron must be
taken to have consented to it because it was within the range of ordinary contact to be
expected in a game
d. Aaron's action will succeed because he did not consent to contact that was not
permitted by the rules of the game - ANSWER c. Although Biff's contact with Aaron was
outside the rules of the game, Aaron must be taken to have consented to it because it
was within the range of ordinary contact to be expected in a game
7. In order to establish the tort of assault, what type of apprehension must the plaintiff
prove that he or she has as a result of the defendant's conduct?
a. Well-founded apprehension of imminent contact by the defendant that would amount
to battery.
b. Acute personal apprehension of imminent contact by the defendant that would
amount to battery - ANSWER a. Well-founded apprehension of imminent contact by the
defendant that would amount to battery.
8. Which of the following must the plaintiff prove as element(s) for the tort of battery?
a. That the defendant intended to injure the plaintiff
