FYLSX Torts Principles & Liability Rules 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A plaintiff sues for defamation per se. Which category of statement is traditionally considered defamatory per se, requiring no proof of actual damages?
- Statements that the plaintiff is unattractive
- Statements that the plaintiff committed a serious crime (Correct answer)
- Statements that the plaintiff is financially unsuccessful
- Statements that the plaintiff holds unpopular opinions
Correct answer: Statements that the plaintiff committed a serious crime
Statements accusing the plaintiff of a serious crime fall within traditional categories of defamation per se, for which damages are presumed.
Question 2: Two cars collide at an intersection. Driver A ran a red light and Driver B was speeding. Both acts contributed to the collision. In a modified comparative fault state (51% bar rule), Driver B with 40% fault:
- Cannot recover because they were also negligent
- Can recover 60% of their damages from Driver A (Correct answer)
- Can recover 100% of their damages from Driver A
- Cannot recover because Driver A was more at fault
Correct answer: Can recover 60% of their damages from Driver A
Under the 51% bar rule, a plaintiff with 40% fault is not barred and recovers damages reduced by their 40% share, receiving 60% of total damages.
Question 3: A dog owner knows her dog has previously bitten a neighbor. The dog bites a mail carrier. In most jurisdictions, the owner's liability is best described as:
- Strict liability because of the known dangerous propensity (Correct answer)
- Negligence per se because owning a dangerous dog is illegal
- No liability because mail carriers assume the risk
- Liability only if the owner failed to leash the dog
Correct answer: Strict liability because of the known dangerous propensity
The 'one bite rule' imposes strict liability on owners who have prior knowledge of their animal's dangerous propensity.
Question 4: A surgeon performs an emergency appendectomy on an unconscious patient without obtaining consent. The patient later objects. Is the surgeon liable for battery?
- Yes, because any surgery without express consent is battery
- No, because implied consent from the emergency situation is a valid defense (Correct answer)
- Yes, because unconscious patients cannot consent
- No, because medical procedures are always privileged
Correct answer: No, because implied consent from the emergency situation is a valid defense
Emergency implied consent is a recognized defense where a patient is unable to consent and a reasonable person would consent to the life-saving procedure.
Question 5: A plaintiff slips on ice on a store's parking lot. The plaintiff cannot identify exactly when the ice formed or how long it was there. The plaintiff relies on res ipsa loquitur. For res ipsa to apply, the plaintiff must show:
- The defendant acted negligently based on direct evidence
- The injury is the kind that ordinarily does not occur without negligence and the defendant had exclusive control (Correct answer)
- The defendant knew about the ice and failed to remove it
- The plaintiff did not contribute to the fall
Correct answer: The injury is the kind that ordinarily does not occur without negligence and the defendant had exclusive control
Res ipsa loquitur requires that the accident type ordinarily implies negligence and the instrumentality was in the defendant's exclusive control.
Question 6: A plaintiff claims intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) because a debt collector called her at 3 a.m. repeatedly and threatened to have her arrested for a civil debt. Which element of IIED is most clearly satisfied?
- Actual physical harm to the plaintiff
- Extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant (Correct answer)
- A pre-existing emotional condition in the plaintiff
- Public disclosure of the plaintiff's debt status
Correct answer: Extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant
IIED requires extreme and outrageous conduct exceeding all bounds tolerated by a civilized society; threatening arrest for a civil debt and repeated 3 a.m. calls meets this standard.
Question 7: A manufacturer sells a power saw without a blade guard. A user is injured when a blade flies off during use. Which theory of products liability is the user most likely to pursue?
- Manufacturing defect, because the guard was missing from this unit
- Design defect, because the product line lacks an adequate safety feature (Correct answer)
- Warning defect, because no instructions were provided
- Strict liability for ultrahazardous activity
Correct answer: Design defect, because the product line lacks an adequate safety feature
Absence of a blade guard reflects a design defect because the entire product line is missing a safety feature that a reasonable alternative design would include.
FYLSX Torts Principles & Liability Rules 5
A plaintiff sues for defamation per se.
Which category of statement is traditionally considered defamatory per se, requiring no proof of actual damages?