Torts & Civil Liability Flashcards
7 cards from real LLM practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Torts & Civil Liability flashcards as text
The Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad case is primarily cited for its holding on:
Answer: The scope of duty and foreseeability limitations on proximate cause
Palsgraf established that a defendant's duty of care extends only to foreseeable plaintiffs, limiting liability based on the zone of foreseeable danger and the relativity of duty.
Under the 'coming and going' rule in vicarious liability, an employer is generally NOT liable for torts committed by employees:
Answer: While commuting to and from work
The 'coming and going' rule generally exempts employers from liability when employees are simply commuting, as this travel is not within the scope of employment.
A private nuisance claim requires the plaintiff to show an interference with their use and enjoyment of land that is:
Answer: Substantial and unreasonable
Private nuisance requires proof that the interference is both substantial (not trivial) and unreasonable (the gravity of the harm outweighs the utility of the defendant's conduct).
In a jurisdiction that follows contributory negligence (not comparative fault), a plaintiff who was 1% at fault for their own injury will:
Answer: Be completely barred from recovery
Under traditional contributory negligence, any fault by the plaintiff—no matter how small—completely bars recovery; this rule has been abandoned by most states in favor of comparative fault.
The 'learned intermediary' doctrine in products liability most commonly applies to:
Answer: Pharmaceutical manufacturers who warn prescribing physicians rather than patients directly
The learned intermediary doctrine allows drug manufacturers to discharge their duty to warn by providing adequate warnings to prescribing physicians, who are then responsible for informing patients.
Which of the following best describes the 'economic loss rule' in tort law?
Answer: Plaintiffs generally cannot recover in negligence for pure economic losses unaccompanied by physical injury or property damage
The economic loss rule bars tort recovery for purely economic losses not accompanied by personal injury or property damage, preserving the boundary between contract and tort law.
Under Rylands v. Fletcher and its American applications, strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities is imposed because:
Answer: One who brings a non-natural dangerous condition onto land bears absolute responsibility for any resulting harm
Rylands v. Fletcher established that a person who brings something onto their land likely to cause mischief if it escapes is strictly liable, independent of negligence, for damage caused by its escape.