Torts Multiple Choice

In a tort case, a corporate defendant that harms its neighbors in the course of business A. Will never be held liable for damages if it has obeyed the law. B. Should be punished proportionally to the danger of its actions. C. Poses a difficult problem for tort law because corporations do not obviously have consciences or mental states such as awareness of the difference between right and wrong. D. Reasonably might be viewed as having taken its neighbors' property or health and therefore ought to compensate them even if its actions were for a socially useful purpose. D. Reasonably might be viewed as having taken its neighbors' property or health and therefore ought to compensate them even if its actions were for a socially useful purpose. The principal area of concern of Tort law is: A. Preventing people or entities from acting in an anti-social manner. B. Enforcing norms or obligations the defendant voluntarily assumed. C.Requiring those who harm others (or their property) to compensate those they harm. D.Protecting an arena in which one is permitted to act largely without regard for the views of others. E.Setting out in advance detailed standards of behavior. C.Requiring those who harm others (or their property) to compensate those they harm. As applied to tort, the aphorism "you break it, you pay for it" emphasizes: A. Even if one is acting in an appropriate manner, if one uses resources (or other people's health and safety), one ought to pay for what one uses. B. In a capitalist, market-based, economy, prices are a critical way in which we allocate resources. For prices to be accurate, producers must pay for all the resources they use - even those that are not usually for sale, such as other people's health or the ecosphere. C. Tort liability is not punishment, even though it may feel that way to those who'd prefer not to pay to clean up their messes, just like requiring a grade-schooler to clean up after finger painting is not a punishment. D. All of the above D. All of the above As applied to tort, the aphorism "clean up your mess" emphasizes: A. Even if you do so innocently or in the course of a productive activity, if you hurt others or their property, you ought to take responsibility for your actions. B. One who injures others while acting within his rights is not responsible for the harm he causes. C. In a modern society, people are assumed to accept the risk of side-effects of beneficial activities by others, such as mining coal. D. The law follows the utilitarian principle of "the greatest good for the greatest number" even when that means that some individuals or their property must be injured. A. Even if you do so innocently or in the course of a productive activity, if you hurt others or their property, you ought to take responsibility for your actions. What is the source of the obligations enforced by tort law? A. The parties' own consent. B. Statutes enacted by the legislature or regulations enacted under its authority. C. Natural law theories regarding the rights one acquires by mixing ones labor with the products of nature. D. Judicial views of social norms that judges believe they can discover. D. Judicial views of social norms that judges believe they can discover. A "defendant" is: A. The person being sued. B. The person suing. C. A person who has lost a lawsuit. D. A person who has been injured. E. A person who injures another. A. The person being sued. In tort cases, if a judge determines that the defendant is liable, the judge is most likely to: A. Issue an injunction ordering the defendant to cease the improper behavior. B. Punish the defendants with a fine intended to create incentives to not injure others in the future. C. Award damages based on the actual injury suffered by the plaintiff, without regard to potential injuries suffered by others. D. Balance the benefits of the defendant's actions against the harm suffered by the plaintiff. C. Award damages based on the actual injury suffered by the plaintiff, without regard to potential injuries suffered by others. In tort, if a court orders the defendant to pay money, it is most likely: A. Punishment paid to the plaintiff on behalf of the public, as a "private attorney general" B. Punishment paid to the state on behalf of the public. C. Damages paid to the plaintiff to restore the plaintiff to the condition plaintiff was in prior to the tort. D. Damages paid to the plaintiff to restore an injustice. C. Damages paid to the plaintiff to restore the plaintiff to the condition plaintiff was in prior to the tort. Tam wants to build a beautiful new home on a coastal beach barrier island connected to the mainland by a low bridge. Her mortgage lender insists that she have flood insurance because it is concerned that, in the event of flood damage, she will not have enough money to both repair the home (which is the bank's security for the loan) and pay back the loan. When she goes to buy flood insurance, her homeowner's insurance carrier declines to sell it, citing the difficult of predicting floods in a period in which the national flood maps are known to be out of date and the relevant government agency is headed by a climate change denier. She is referred to a high-risk carrier which wants to charge her 10% of the value of her home each year. While the national flood maps predict that her new home might be flooded every 20 years or so, some forecasters believe that the increase in sea levels and more virulent storms due to warmer seas mean that floods will be far worse than the old predictions and that there is even a 20% chance that the entire barrier island will be uninhabitable within the term of Tam's mortgage. Which of the following is most accurate? A. The high-risk insurance company is taking advantage of Tam's lack of market power to charge her a price that should not exist in a competitive market. It would be appropriate for regulators force it to charge less. B. The high cost of insurance is a market failure that can only be solved by recreating the national flood insurance plan, which would prevent discrimination against homeowners in flood zones. C. The high cost of insurance for Tam reflects the high cost of living in flood zones, where rescue, repair and rebuilding are highly predictable charges that insurers must include when setting their rates. Any insurer that charges less than the claims than it will predictably have to pay out will be unable to remain solvent, absent tax-payer financed subsidies (such as the repeated bailouts of the Federal flood insurance system). If society wishes to subsidize Tam's desire to live on the beach, it should probably do so in a transparent way that allows voters, politicians and Tam to see the subsidy and consider whether it is the best use of our collective resources. D. Tam's decision to build on her own property is a personal freedom that should not be subject to regulation by big government. C. The high cost of insurance for Tam reflects the high cost of living in flood zones, where rescue, repair and rebuilding are highly predictable charges that insurers must include when setting their rates. Any insurer that charges less than the claims than it will predictably have to pay out will be unable to remain solvent, absent tax-payer financed subsidies (such as the repeated bailouts of the Federal flood insurance system). If society wishes to subsidize Tam's desire to live on the beach, it should probably do so in a transparent way that allows voters, politicians and Tam to see the subsidy and consider whether it is the best use of our collective resources. Insurance -- both private (such as homeowner's liability/fire insurance, no-fault auto accident insurance, or medical insurance) and public (such as worker's compensation, Social Security Administration , Social Security Disability Insurance, flood insurance) -- is sometimes used as a substitute for tort, or to remedy some of the deficiencies of tort (e.g., Liability insurance, especially when it is legally mandated, can protects victims against insolvent tortfeasors). Similarly, publicly funded services can fully or partially substitute for tort: for example, Veterans Administration medical care, Superfund pollution cleanups or Army Corp flood prevention. Which of the following is accurate? A. One goal of both tort and insurance is to spread the cost of injuries, since smaller, predictable, charges are usually less painful than large, unpredictable ones. Tort spreads costs by allowing victims to charge tortfeasors for the wrongful damage they do, assuming they can identify a solvent tortfeasor at fault. If the tortfeasor is a company, it may spread costs by raising its prices (or lowering pay or investor returns), thus making its participants pay for the damages. Or it may insure, in which case the costs ultimately will be borne by all insureds. Unfortunately, insolvent tortfeasors escape liability, and companies may be tempted to create insolvency in order to lower (private) costs. Insurance spreads costs among insurance holders directly. Market pressures, unless the law intervenes, normally mean that private insurance will charge insureds according to the risk they pose to the insurance company, and will redistribute among a risk group from lucky policy holders (who do not suffer injuries) to unlucky ones. Public insurance may be priced differently, but also redistributes from taxpayers or insureds who do not file claims to those who do. Unfortunately, if insurance is not required, insolvent persons may be tempted to go without. B. One goal of both tort and insurance is to create incentives for appropriate levels of safety and care. Tort, by charging people or companies who injure others, gives potential tortfeasors an incentive to invest in safety in order to avoid liability. Unfortunately, this incentive only works if the potential tortfeasor identifies its risk in advance. Additionally, it provides an incentive to hide bad behavior, take advantage of weaker victims who may not be able to assert their rights, invest in aggressive litigation to avoid responsibility, or transfer dangerous activities to insolvent actors. First party insurance -- such as medical, fire and no-fault car insurance -- generally charges according to the likelihood of the insured becoming a victim. Since those at high risk pay more, it creates an incentive for potential victims to visibly reduce the risks they face. Unfortunately, many risks are not reasonably within the victim's control, and first party insurance does not provide incentives for tortfeasor care or safety. Third party insurance, such as liability insurance or worker's comp, charges insureds according to their risk of causing compensable injury, as determined by the insurer. If the insurer is not able to distinguish risk properly, this may result in good actors subsidizing bad actors. C. Tort and insurance can only work if the fact finders are able to make accurate determinations. Tort requires the fact finder to determine difficult issues of intent and fault, and requires the fact finder to make an individualized finding of damages. Thus, it often generates expensive litigation and high legal costs. Insurance determinations are generally made by relatively low-paid bureaucrats on the basis of relatively simple findings of damage and causation, and standard valuations set bureaucratically. If the insurer is run efficiently, this should be a far cheaper, if less individualized, adjudication method. More of the costs of the system, then, go to remedy injuries instead of to intermediaries such as lawyers. D. A and C but not B are correct E. All of A, B, and C are correct. E. All of A, B, and C are correct. Doreen sees Pedro's child Paul acting very badly in the courtyard of the building where they all live, refusing to do his homework and smearing chocolate on another neighbor's dog. Doreen believes firmly in the Biblical aphorism, "spare the rod spoil the child." In order to save Paul from a lifetime of bad behavior, spoilation, misery and, undoubtedly, eventual crime, she slaps him. Shocked, Paul says, "what did you that for?" and when she explains, he sees that she was right. From then on, he behaves quite a bit better. However, he and his dad decide to sue Doreen in battery anyway. The above facts are undisputed. A. Paul should prevail if a reasonable person would find a slap by a non-parent to be offensive. B. Paul should prevail because he did not consent to being slapped. C. Doreen should prevail because, on balance, Paul suffered no harm. D. Doreen should prevail because Paul agreed after the fact that the slap was appropriate, thus consenting. A. Paul should prevail if a reasonable person would find a slap by a non-parent to be offensive. Alafair is, and knows she is, stunningly beautiful. At a singles' bar, she flirts with Bob, who is sitting beside her. Uninvited, she kisses him. He is horrified, upset and offended and sues Alafair for battery. Her testimony is that she meant no harm. A. Alafair should prevail because she caused no harm or offense. B. Alafair should prevail because a kiss is not the sort of touching that reasonable people view as harmful or offensive. C. Alafair should prevail in a dual intent state only, because while she intended to kiss him, she did not intend to harm or offend him. D. Alafair should prevail because she reasonably believed that a man in a singles' bar, flirting with a beautiful woman, would consent to a kiss. E. Alafair should prevail because any reasonable heterosexual man in a singles' bar would have consented to her kiss. C. Alafair should prevail in a dual intent state only, because while she intended to kiss him, she did not intend to harm or offend him. Dirk is checking his email while driving down the highway at 70 mph. He suddenly notices that he is drifting out of his lane and into the way of a rapidly approaching car. He slams on his brakes. A driver in a car behind him is startled and brakes as well; the second car spins out of control, hitting Victoria's new car. Victoria's car is totaled and she was terrified and suffered black and blue marks. She did not require any medical treatment, but she has to replace her car. Victoria sues Dirk in battery. Her complaint states the above facts. Dirk contends that the case against him should be dismissed. (Remember: on a motion to dismiss, the Court must assume that the claims in the complaint are true, and should make reasonable inferences from those facts that favor the plaintiff.) Which is the weakest part of Victoria's case? A. Dirk mainly harmed Victoria's car, not Victoria. B. Dirk did not touch Victoria -- any injury he did to her was indirect. C. Dirk did not intend to touch Victoria -- although he did intend to slam on the brakes. D. Victoria was not physically injured in any significant way. C. Dirk did not intend to touch Victoria -- although he did intend to slam on the brakes. The great change in the law symbolized by Brown v. Kendall is: A. Prior to Brown v. Kendall, the common law ordinarily did not find liability for merely acting negligently, i.e., without due care. B. Prior to Brown v. Kendall, the common law imposed liability without regard to care when an actor directly injured another. C. Prior to Brown v. Kendall, the common law imposed liability on people who hurt others while beating dogs. D. Prior to Brown v. Kendall, the common law required those who cause damage to others to compensate their victims. B. Prior to Brown v. Kendall, the common law imposed liability without regard to care when an actor directly injured another. On a motion for summary judgment, the uncontested evidence shows that Don believes that, like Midas, he can turn people into gold by touching them. He shakes hands with Patricia, gently and inoffensively, intending to turn her into gold. Of course, she doesn't turn into gold. However, Don's handshake inadvertently transmits a wasting disease to Patricia, who suffers horribly as a result. In Patricia's suit for damages in battery, the most persuasive argument is: A. Don is liable because he intended to harm her, and he did in fact harm her by touching her, even if the harm was not the harm he intended. B. Don is liable because he touched her in a manner that reasonable people would agree is harmful. C. Don is not liable because most people would agree that shaking hands is a socially appropriate action that is neither harmful nor offensive. D. Don is not liable because the injury he caused was entirely unintentional. A. Don is liable because he intended to harm her, and he did in fact harm her by touching her, even if the harm was not the harm he intended.