BLAW 3310 Exam 2 Questions and Correct Answers
Question 1
Torts
Correct Answer
An injury or wrong committed with or without force against another person or his properly; a civil wrong that is a breach
of a legal duty owed by the person who commits the tort to the victim of the tort
Question 2
Negligence Pg 147
Correct Answer
The failure to do something that a reasonable person, guided by the ordinary considerations that regulate human affairs,
would do or the doing of something that a reasonable person would not do
Question 3
"Reasonable person" standard of care
Correct Answer
Represents how persons in the relevant community ought to behave; a theoretical concept It describes a hypothetical
person who acts in a reasonable manner under the circumstances. Perfection is not required but errors in judgment must
be reasonable or excusable under circumstances, or negligence will be found
Page 1 of 47
,Question 4
Professional standard e.g. breach called malpractice
Correct Answer
Medical malpractice; The patient expects the doctor and his subordinates to adhere to standards that would prevent
undue harm and distress to patients under his or her care
Question 5
Causation in fact
Correct Answer
An act or omission without which an event would not have occurred. Courts express this in the form of a rule commonly
referred to as the "but for" rule: the injury to a person would not have happened but for the conduct of the wrongdoer
Question 6
Proximate cause
Correct Answer
In tort law, the action of the defendant that produces the plaintiffs injuries, without which the injury/damage in question
would not have existed
Page 2 of 47
,Question 7
Premises liability e.g. invitee
Correct Answer
An intentional tort, or a tort based on negligence, when the owner or party with responsibility for maintaining certain
properly fails to provide adequate safely for vistors to the properly against criminal attacks or accidents
Question 8
Palsgraf vs. Long Island Railway Pg 145
Correct Answer
_____________________ was hit pretty bad on the head after a railroad worker helped get a man onboard a train, but
dropped a package full of fireworks. The fireworks exploded caused some scales on the platform, where she was
standing, to fall, thus hitting her.
There was no negligence on the part of the railroad, and no proximate cause in the entire situation. Long Island Railroad
Company won the case.
Case dealt with proximate cause.
Question 9
Defenses to negligence
Correct Answer
The defense would be when the plaintiff had knowledge of the danger, voluntarily exposed himself to the danger, and
was injured.
Page 3 of 47
, Question 10
Assumption of Risk
Correct Answer
States a plaintiff may not recover for the injuries or damages that result from an activity in which the plaintiff willingly
participated.
Question 11
Exculpatory clause
Correct Answer
A part of a contract that releases one of the parties from liability for their wrongdoings; not favored at laws
Question 12
Comparative negligence
Correct Answer
A defense to negligence whereby the plaintiffs damages are reduced by the proportion his fault bears to the total injury
he has suffered
Question 13
51% Rule for contributory negligence
Correct Answer
The plaintiff must contribute at least 51% of the negligence for no recovery to be allowed.
Page 4 of 47
Question 1
Torts
Correct Answer
An injury or wrong committed with or without force against another person or his properly; a civil wrong that is a breach
of a legal duty owed by the person who commits the tort to the victim of the tort
Question 2
Negligence Pg 147
Correct Answer
The failure to do something that a reasonable person, guided by the ordinary considerations that regulate human affairs,
would do or the doing of something that a reasonable person would not do
Question 3
"Reasonable person" standard of care
Correct Answer
Represents how persons in the relevant community ought to behave; a theoretical concept It describes a hypothetical
person who acts in a reasonable manner under the circumstances. Perfection is not required but errors in judgment must
be reasonable or excusable under circumstances, or negligence will be found
Page 1 of 47
,Question 4
Professional standard e.g. breach called malpractice
Correct Answer
Medical malpractice; The patient expects the doctor and his subordinates to adhere to standards that would prevent
undue harm and distress to patients under his or her care
Question 5
Causation in fact
Correct Answer
An act or omission without which an event would not have occurred. Courts express this in the form of a rule commonly
referred to as the "but for" rule: the injury to a person would not have happened but for the conduct of the wrongdoer
Question 6
Proximate cause
Correct Answer
In tort law, the action of the defendant that produces the plaintiffs injuries, without which the injury/damage in question
would not have existed
Page 2 of 47
,Question 7
Premises liability e.g. invitee
Correct Answer
An intentional tort, or a tort based on negligence, when the owner or party with responsibility for maintaining certain
properly fails to provide adequate safely for vistors to the properly against criminal attacks or accidents
Question 8
Palsgraf vs. Long Island Railway Pg 145
Correct Answer
_____________________ was hit pretty bad on the head after a railroad worker helped get a man onboard a train, but
dropped a package full of fireworks. The fireworks exploded caused some scales on the platform, where she was
standing, to fall, thus hitting her.
There was no negligence on the part of the railroad, and no proximate cause in the entire situation. Long Island Railroad
Company won the case.
Case dealt with proximate cause.
Question 9
Defenses to negligence
Correct Answer
The defense would be when the plaintiff had knowledge of the danger, voluntarily exposed himself to the danger, and
was injured.
Page 3 of 47
, Question 10
Assumption of Risk
Correct Answer
States a plaintiff may not recover for the injuries or damages that result from an activity in which the plaintiff willingly
participated.
Question 11
Exculpatory clause
Correct Answer
A part of a contract that releases one of the parties from liability for their wrongdoings; not favored at laws
Question 12
Comparative negligence
Correct Answer
A defense to negligence whereby the plaintiffs damages are reduced by the proportion his fault bears to the total injury
he has suffered
Question 13
51% Rule for contributory negligence
Correct Answer
The plaintiff must contribute at least 51% of the negligence for no recovery to be allowed.
Page 4 of 47
