MT Bar Torts 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: In Montana, which element is NOT required to prove defamation?
- A false statement of fact
- Publication to at least one third party
- Malice in all cases (Correct answer)
- Damages (or presumed damages for defamation per se)
Correct answer: Malice in all cases
Malice is required only when the plaintiff is a public figure or the statement involves a matter of public concern; private plaintiffs need only show negligence.
Question 2: A Montana plaintiff suing for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) must show conduct that is:
- Merely offensive or insensitive
- Extreme and outrageous beyond all bounds of decency (Correct answer)
- Negligent and foreseeable
- Directed at a third party only
Correct answer: Extreme and outrageous beyond all bounds of decency
IIED in Montana requires proof of extreme and outrageous conduct that goes beyond all possible bounds of decency and is utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
Question 3: Under Montana's dram shop law (MCA § 27-1-710), a licensed alcohol vendor may be liable for injuries caused by an intoxicated patron if:
- The vendor sold alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person
- The vendor served alcohol to anyone who later drove
- The patron was under 18 regardless of visible intoxication
- Both A and C (Correct answer)
Correct answer: Both A and C
Montana's dram shop statute imposes liability on vendors who serve visibly intoxicated persons or minors, and the intoxication is a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.
Question 4: In Montana, which of the following is the correct standard for negligence per se?
- Violation of any statute conclusively establishes negligence
- Violation of a statute designed to protect a class of persons including plaintiff from the type of harm that occurred creates a presumption of negligence (Correct answer)
- Criminal statutes never establish negligence per se
- Only federal regulations can create negligence per se
Correct answer: Violation of a statute designed to protect a class of persons including plaintiff from the type of harm that occurred creates a presumption of negligence
Montana applies negligence per se when a party violates a statute designed to protect a class of persons that includes the plaintiff from the specific type of harm that occurred.
Question 5: Under Montana law, which doctrine imposes strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities?
- Res ipsa loquitur
- Respondeat superior
- Rylands v. Fletcher / Restatement § 519-520 (Correct answer)
- Assumption of the risk
Correct answer: Rylands v. Fletcher / Restatement § 519-520
Montana follows the Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 519-520, imposing strict liability on those who carry on abnormally dangerous activities that cannot be made safe by any amount of care.
Question 6: In a Montana medical malpractice case, a plaintiff generally must establish the standard of care through:
- Common knowledge (the case speaks for itself)
- Expert testimony from a qualified medical professional (Correct answer)
- The defendant physician's own testimony only
- Published hospital guidelines
Correct answer: Expert testimony from a qualified medical professional
Montana requires expert medical testimony to establish the applicable standard of care in malpractice cases, unless the negligence is so obvious that a layperson can understand it (common knowledge exception).
MT Bar Torts 2
In Montana, which element is NOT required to prove defamation?