A) negligence per se
B) foreseeable trespasser
C) attractive nuisance
D) respondeat superior
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) libel.
B) slander.
C) malicious intent.
D) invasion of privacy.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The court ruled that publication occurred and that the employees could proceed with a cause of action based on invasion of privacy.
B) The court ruled that the employees had no right to privacy in relation to distribution of social security numbers because the numbers are issued by the government.
C) The court ruled that the employees could not proceed with an action for invasion of privacy because no publication of the information at issue occurred.
D) The court ruled that the employees could not proceed with an action for invasion of privacy because health information was not involved.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Let the master answer
B) Let the servant answer
C) Let the servant or master answer
D) The master was negligent
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) That it appears that the necessary elements are present for him to succeed in an action against Blake for battery so long as he can show apprehension of being struck.
B) That he could not win in an action for battery because he admitted that he was not afraid.
C) That he could not win in an action for battery because Blake did not actually strike him.
D) That he could not win in an action for battery because it appears that Blake's actions were justified.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) That it appears that the necessary elements are present for him to succeed in an action against Blake for assault so long as he can show apprehension of being struck.
B) That he could not win in an action for assault because he admitted that he was not afraid.
C) That he could not win in an action for assault because Blake did not actually strike him.
D) That he could not win in an action for assault because it appears that Blake's actions were justified.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) A truck backed into a fence.
B) A jar of jam fell on your foot.
C) A post operative x-ray showed a surgical sponge in your stomach.
D) A door slammed on your foot.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) joint and individual liability
B) cumulative liability
C) contributory liability
D) joint and several
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) trespass.
B) nuisance.
C) ultra hazardous activities.
D) strict liability.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The plaintiff was a friend of the defendant.
B) The defendant did not intend to harm the plaintiff.
C) The defendant was concerned for the safety of the plaintiff.
D) The plaintiff contributed to his own injuries.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Assault is an intentional, nonconsensual act that gives rise to the apprehension that a harmful or offensive contact is imminent.
B) Assault is an intentional, nonconsensual act that gives rise to the fear that a harmful or offensive contact is imminent.
C) Assault is a negligent, nonconsensual act that gives rise to the apprehension that a harmful or offensive contact is imminent.
D) Assault is a negligent, nonconsensual act that gives rise to the fear that a harmful or offensive contact is imminent.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The cost to repair or replace an item.
B) The decrease in market value of an item.
C) Compensation for medical expenses.
D) Damages to deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) contributory negligence
B) comparative negligence
C) contribution
D) indemnity
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) That an employer had no duties in regard to an animal on the premises because of the rule that animals cannot be absolutely controlled under any circumstances.
B) That an employer can be held strictly liable for failing to protect an employee from getting attached by a dog, even if the dog is not known to possess abnormally dangerous propensities.
C) That an employer cannot be negligent for failing to protect an employee from getting attached by a dog unless the dog is not known to possess abnormally dangerous propensities.
D) That an employer can be negligent for failing to protect an employee from getting attached by a dog, even if the dog is not known to possess abnormally dangerous propensities.
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 1 - 20 of 61
Related Exams