MO Bar Torts 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities requires which of the following?
- Proof that the defendant acted negligently in conducting the activity
- The activity must pose a serious risk of harm that cannot be eliminated by reasonable care (Correct answer)
- The plaintiff must have been unaware of the risk created by the activity
- The defendant must have intended to engage in a dangerous activity
Correct answer: The activity must pose a serious risk of harm that cannot be eliminated by reasonable care
Strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities applies when the activity creates a serious risk of harm not eliminable by reasonable care and is not a matter of common usage.
Question 2: Which element distinguishes intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) from negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED)?
- IIED requires physical impact; NIED does not
- IIED requires extreme and outrageous conduct intended to cause severe distress; NIED requires only negligent conduct (Correct answer)
- NIED allows higher damages than IIED
- IIED applies only to public figures; NIED applies to all plaintiffs
Correct answer: IIED requires extreme and outrageous conduct intended to cause severe distress; NIED requires only negligent conduct
IIED requires intentional or reckless extreme and outrageous conduct causing severe emotional distress, whereas NIED is based on a negligence standard.
Question 3: In a products liability case based on manufacturing defect, a plaintiff must show:
- The product deviated from its intended design in a way that made it unreasonably dangerous (Correct answer)
- The product's design was inherently unreasonable
- The manufacturer failed to warn about all known risks
- The defendant was negligent in the manufacturing process
Correct answer: The product deviated from its intended design in a way that made it unreasonably dangerous
A manufacturing defect claim requires showing that the specific product deviated from the intended design, making it more dangerous than products that conform to the design.
Question 4: A private nuisance claim requires that the plaintiff show the defendant's conduct:
- Caused physical damage to the plaintiff's property
- Substantially and unreasonably interfered with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their land (Correct answer)
- Constituted a criminal offense under state law
- Occurred on the plaintiff's property
Correct answer: Substantially and unreasonably interfered with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their land
Private nuisance protects against substantial, unreasonable interference with a plaintiff's use and enjoyment of their land.
Question 5: Under the Restatement (Second) approach, a landowner owes which duty to a licensee?
- No duty whatsoever
- A duty to inspect for and warn of all dangerous conditions
- A duty to warn of known dangerous conditions not likely to be discovered by the licensee (Correct answer)
- The same duty owed to an invitee
Correct answer: A duty to warn of known dangerous conditions not likely to be discovered by the licensee
A landowner owes a licensee the duty to warn of known dangerous conditions that are not obvious or known to the licensee.
Question 6: The tort of trespass to land is actionable:
- Only when the defendant knew the land belonged to someone else
- Regardless of whether the defendant intended to enter the land of another person (Correct answer)
- Only when the plaintiff suffers actual damages
- Only when the defendant's entry was continuous
Correct answer: Regardless of whether the defendant intended to enter the land of another person
Trespass to land is an intentional tort requiring only that the defendant intended to enter the land; a mistake about ownership is not a defense.
Question 7: Which of the following is a valid affirmative defense to an assault claim?
- The defendant did not intend to cause apprehension in a third party
- The plaintiff consented to the defendant's conduct (Correct answer)
- The contact was harmless
- The defendant did not actually touch the plaintiff
Correct answer: The plaintiff consented to the defendant's conduct
Consent is a complete defense to assault; if the plaintiff agreed to the conduct, the defendant is not liable.
MO Bar Torts 2
Strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities requires which of the following?