CLA/CP Exam Torts: Negligence and Liability 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Under strict products liability (Restatement Second §402A), a seller is liable when a product is sold in a 'defective condition unreasonably dangerous.' This standard applies to:
- Only manufacturers, not retailers
- Any seller in the commercial chain of distribution (Correct answer)
- Only sellers with actual knowledge of the defect
- Only sellers who acted negligently in making the product
Correct answer: Any seller in the commercial chain of distribution
Section 402A strict products liability extends to all commercial sellers in the distribution chain, not just manufacturers, regardless of fault.
Question 2: A duty to warn about product dangers is generally triggered when:
- Any consumer could conceivably misuse the product
- The risk is non-obvious and the seller has superior knowledge of it (Correct answer)
- The product has caused at least one prior injury
- The plaintiff was using the product for a non-intended purpose
Correct answer: The risk is non-obvious and the seller has superior knowledge of it
The duty to warn arises when the danger is not obvious to ordinary users and the manufacturer/seller has superior knowledge of the risk.
Question 3: In a 'modified comparative negligence' (50% bar rule) jurisdiction, a plaintiff who is found 50% at fault may:
- Recover 50% of damages (Correct answer)
- Not recover at all
- Recover full damages
- Recover 50% only if the defendant was also negligent
Correct answer: Recover 50% of damages
Under the 50% bar rule, a plaintiff at exactly 50% fault may still recover (reduced to 50%), but recovery is barred at 51% or more.
Question 4: Which element of negligence asks whether the defendant's conduct fell below the applicable standard of care?
- Duty
- Breach (Correct answer)
- Causation
- Damages
Correct answer: Breach
Breach is the element that evaluates whether the defendant's conduct fell below the standard of care owed to the plaintiff.
Question 5: The 'danger invites rescue' doctrine, established in Wagner v. International Railway, holds that:
- A rescuer cannot recover because they assumed the risk
- A tortfeasor is liable to a rescuer injured while attempting to save a person endangered by the tortfeasor's negligence (Correct answer)
- Only professional rescuers may recover for rescue injuries
- A rescuer's negligence is automatically imputed to the original victim
Correct answer: A tortfeasor is liable to a rescuer injured while attempting to save a person endangered by the tortfeasor's negligence
The danger-invites-rescue doctrine recognizes that rescuers are foreseeable plaintiffs, making the original tortfeasor liable for injuries to reasonable rescuers.
Question 6: A child defendant in a negligence case is held to the standard of:
- A reasonable adult
- A reasonable child of similar age, intelligence, and experience (Correct answer)
- Strict liability regardless of intent
- No standard—children cannot be negligent
Correct answer: A reasonable child of similar age, intelligence, and experience
Children are generally held to the standard of a reasonable child of the same age, intelligence, and experience, not the adult reasonable person standard.
Question 7: Which concept describes the principle that a defendant is not liable for highly extraordinary consequences that were not a foreseeable risk of their negligence?
- Contributory negligence
- Superceding cause
- Palsgraf limitation / proximate cause (Correct answer)
- Assumption of risk
Correct answer: Palsgraf limitation / proximate cause
The Palsgraf decision and proximate cause doctrine limit liability to harms within the foreseeable zone of danger created by defendant's negligent conduct.
