CT Bar Contracts & Torts 3

Question 1

A driver texting behind the wheel strikes a cyclist who was jaywalking. The jury finds the driver 70% at fault and the cyclist 30% at fault. Connecticut follows:

Accepted Answer

Modified comparative fault — cyclist recovers 70% if below 51% at fault

Answer

Pure contributory negligence — cyclist recovers nothing

Answer

Pure comparative fault — cyclist recovers 70% of damages

Answer

Last clear chance doctrine only

Question 2

When does a contract for the sale of goods over $500 fall outside the Statute of Frauds writing requirement?

Accepted Answer

When the goods are specially manufactured and not suitable for resale in the ordinary course

Answer

When both parties are merchants

Answer

When the offer is irrevocable

Answer

When the buyer has received an invoice

Question 3

A products liability plaintiff sues a manufacturer in strict liability. The manufacturer's best defense is that:

Accepted Answer

The plaintiff assumed the risk by using the product despite knowing of the defect

Answer

It exercised reasonable care in the manufacturing process

Answer

The product met all applicable industry safety standards

Answer

The defect was foreseeable but unavoidable

Question 4

Under contract law, an anticipatory repudiation occurs when a party:

Accepted Answer

Unequivocally indicates before performance is due that they will not perform

Answer

Fails to perform on the due date

Answer

Requests a modification the other party refuses

Answer

Performs in a defective manner

Question 5

In a defamation case, a private figure plaintiff suing a media defendant over a matter of public concern must prove:

Accepted Answer

Negligence as to the falsity of the statement

Answer

Actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard)

Answer

Strict liability — no fault element needed

Answer

Intentional infliction of reputational harm

Question 6

A hotel guest is injured when a hallway handrail collapses. The guest sues under negligence per se, alleging a building code violation. Negligence per se requires:

Accepted Answer

That the plaintiff was in the class protected by the statute and the harm is of the type the statute was designed to prevent

Answer

Proof that the defendant knew of the violation

Answer

Expert testimony establishing the applicable standard of care

Answer

Evidence that reasonable persons would have installed a stronger rail

Question 7

Which doctrine allows a court to imply a promise to prevent a party from being unjustly enriched when no enforceable contract exists?

Accepted Answer

Quasi-contract (implied-in-law contract)

Answer

Promissory estoppel

Answer

Implied-in-fact contract

Answer

Accord and satisfaction