Lawyer Tort Law 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: In a jurisdiction that follows pure contributory negligence, a plaintiff found 5% at fault for their own injuries will:
- Have their damages reduced by 5%
- Be completely barred from recovering any damages (Correct answer)
- Recover 95% of their total damages
- Recover only if the defendant was at least 50% at fault
Correct answer: Be completely barred from recovering any damages
Under pure contributory negligence, any fault on the plaintiff's part — even 1% — completely bars all recovery; this all-or-nothing rule is retained in only a few states.
Question 2: Under the traditional common law classification of entrants, a landowner's duty to trespassers is limited to:
- Reasonable care under all circumstances
- Only a duty to warn of known artificial conditions on the land
- Refraining from willful, wanton, or intentional harm (Correct answer)
- Full reasonable care if the trespasser was invited by a tenant
Correct answer: Refraining from willful, wanton, or intentional harm
At common law, landowners owe adult trespassers only the duty to refrain from willful or wanton harm, though the attractive nuisance doctrine imposes a higher duty toward child trespassers.
Question 3: Under the discovery rule for tort statutes of limitations, the limitations period begins to run when:
- The defendant commits the wrongful act giving rise to the claim
- The plaintiff files a complaint with the appropriate court
- The plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered the injury and its cause (Correct answer)
- A fixed period of 10 years elapses from the date of injury
Correct answer: The plaintiff discovers or reasonably should have discovered the injury and its cause
The discovery rule tolls the statute of limitations until the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury and its connection to the defendant's conduct.
Question 4: Punitive damages in a tort case are primarily intended to:
- Compensate the plaintiff fully for all economic losses sustained
- Punish the defendant for egregious conduct and deter similar future behavior (Correct answer)
- Cover the plaintiff's past and future medical expenses
- Reimburse the plaintiff for non-economic losses such as pain and suffering
Correct answer: Punish the defendant for egregious conduct and deter similar future behavior
Punitive (exemplary) damages go beyond compensating the plaintiff; they are awarded to punish defendants for malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent conduct and to deter similar misconduct.
Question 5: A private nuisance claim requires the plaintiff to prove:
- Government action unreasonably affecting the general public's use of land
- An unreasonable, substantial interference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their property (Correct answer)
- A physical trespass or entry onto the plaintiff's land by the defendant
- Intentional destruction of the plaintiff's personal property
Correct answer: An unreasonable, substantial interference with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their property
Private nuisance is an unreasonable, substantial interference with an individual's use and enjoyment of their land and does not require any physical invasion of the property.
Question 6: Defamation 'per se' differs from ordinary defamation in that:
- It applies only to statements made about public figures
- The statements are so inherently harmful that damages are presumed without specific proof (Correct answer)
- The plaintiff must prove actual malice by the defendant
- It applies only to written (libelous) statements, not oral (slanderous) ones
Correct answer: The statements are so inherently harmful that damages are presumed without specific proof
Defamation per se involves categories of statements (e.g., accusations of a crime, loathsome disease, professional misconduct, or sexual immorality) so inherently harmful that damages are legally presumed.
Question 7: Under the Restatement (Second) § 402A standard for strict products liability, a plaintiff must show:
- The manufacturer was negligent in designing or manufacturing the product
- The product was in an unreasonably dangerous defective condition when it left the seller's control (Correct answer)
- The consumer failed to follow the product's warning label instructions
- The product caused any type of harm, regardless of whether it was defective
Correct answer: The product was in an unreasonably dangerous defective condition when it left the seller's control
Strict products liability under § 402A attaches when a product is in an unreasonably dangerous defective condition (design, manufacturing, or warning defect) at the time it left the defendant's control.
Lawyer Tort Law 2
In a jurisdiction that follows pure contributory negligence, a plaintiff found 5% at fault for their own injuries will: