FYLSX - Baby Bar Torts: Negligence and Causation Questions and Answers

Question 1

A driver, while negligently operating his vehicle, collides with a utility pole.
The collision causes a power outage in a nearby hospital.
The hospital's backup generator fails to start, and a patient on life support dies.
The patient's family sues the driver for wrongful death.
The driver's best defense against the negligence claim is that his conduct was not the:

Accepted Answer

Proximate cause of the patient's death.

Answer

Actual cause of the patient's death.

Answer

A breach of the duty of care owed to the patient.

Answer

An act of malfeasance.

Question 2

A plaintiff was injured when a piano, being lifted by a crane to a fifth-floor apartment, fell and struck her. The plaintiff has no direct evidence of what specific act the crane operator performed negligently. Which of the following legal doctrines would be most helpful to the plaintiff in establishing the operator's breach of duty?

Accepted Answer

Res ipsa loquitur

Answer

Negligence per se

Answer

The 'but-for' test

Answer

Joint and several liability

Question 3

In a negligence action, the 'but-for' test is used to determine which of the following elements?

Accepted Answer

Actual cause

Answer

Breach of duty

Answer

Proximate cause

Answer

Duty

Question 4

Driver A negligently runs a red light, striking a truck carrying dynamite. The truck explodes, and the resulting concussion shatters a window in a building a block away, injuring a person inside. Under the majority (Cardozo) view expressed in Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., why might the driver not be liable for the person's injuries?

Accepted Answer

The person was not a foreseeable plaintiff.

Answer

The driver's actions were not the actual cause of the injury.

Answer

The explosion of the truck was a superseding cause.

Answer

The driver did not breach a duty of care.

Question 5

A construction company leaves a deep, unmarked trench in a residential neighborhood. That night, an unexpected and severe earthquake causes a man walking nearby to lose his balance and fall into the trench, sustaining serious injuries. The man sues the construction company for negligence. Which of the following is the company's strongest argument against liability?

Accepted Answer

The earthquake was a superseding cause that cuts off liability.

Answer

The company owed no duty to the man.

Answer

The company did not breach its duty of care.

Answer

The man assumed the risk of walking at night.

Question 6

Two friends, Cain and Abel, are simultaneously and independently hunting in a forest. Both negligently fire their shotguns in the direction of a hiker. The hiker is struck by a single pellet and loses an eye, but it is impossible to determine which hunter fired the shot that caused the injury. The hiker sues both Cain and Abel. What is the likely outcome?

Accepted Answer

The court will apply the doctrine of alternative liability, shifting the burden of proof to Cain and Abel.

Answer

The hiker's claim will fail because he cannot prove which defendant was the actual cause of his injury.

Answer

Only the hunter who fired first can be held liable.

Answer

Neither hunter will be liable because their negligence was not the proximate cause of the injury.