NPPE Tort Law and Negligence 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: In a negligence action against an architect, which element requires the plaintiff to show that the harm would not have occurred 'but for' the defendant's conduct?
- Duty of care
- Breach of standard of care
- Causation in fact (Correct answer)
- Proximate cause
Correct answer: Causation in fact
Causation in fact (actual cause) uses the 'but for' test to establish that the defendant's breach directly caused the plaintiff's injury.
Question 2: A structural engineer seals drawings containing an error that causes a building collapse five years after construction. Which doctrine most likely determines whether the engineer can be sued?
- Res ipsa loquitur
- Statute of repose (Correct answer)
- Contributory negligence
- Assumption of risk
Correct answer: Statute of repose
Statutes of repose set an absolute time limit from project completion after which tort claims are barred, regardless of when the harm is discovered.
Question 3: An owner builds without permits on a design the architect warned was non-compliant. A neighbor is injured due to a code violation. Under contributory fault principles, what is the likely outcome for the architect?
- Full liability because the architect prepared the design
- Reduced liability proportional to the owner's comparative fault (Correct answer)
- No liability because the owner assumed all risk by proceeding
- Strict liability regardless of fault allocation
Correct answer: Reduced liability proportional to the owner's comparative fault
Most US jurisdictions apply comparative fault, apportioning damages among all negligent parties based on their degree of responsibility.
Question 4: Which tort doctrine allows a court to infer negligence when an event causing injury is of the type that ordinarily does not occur without negligence?
- Assumption of risk
- Res ipsa loquitur (Correct answer)
- Last clear chance
- Proximate causation
Correct answer: Res ipsa loquitur
Res ipsa loquitur permits an inference of negligence when the instrumentality was in the defendant's control and the accident would not normally occur absent negligence.
Question 5: A landscape architect negligently designs a retaining wall that collapses, injuring a pedestrian on a public sidewalk. What legal relationship establishes the duty of care owed to that pedestrian?
- Privity of contract between the pedestrian and the firm
- Foreseeability that third parties could be harmed by the work (Correct answer)
- A written agreement specifically naming foreseeable victims
- Statutory duty owed only to the project owner
Correct answer: Foreseeability that third parties could be harmed by the work
Post-MacPherson, duty extends beyond contractual privity to any person who could foreseeably be harmed by negligent professional work.
Question 6: During construction, a contractor deviates from approved structural drawings, and the building later collapses. If the engineer of record did not perform site visits required by contract, how is liability typically allocated?
- Contractor bears 100% liability for all deviations
- Engineer bears 100% liability for failure to inspect
- Liability may be shared proportionally based on each party's negligence (Correct answer)
- The owner absorbs all liability as the party who hired both
Correct answer: Liability may be shared proportionally based on each party's negligence
Courts apply comparative fault principles, examining each party's contribution—the contractor's deviation and the engineer's failure to detect it during required inspections.
Question 7: What distinguishes a 'nuisance per se' from a 'nuisance in fact' in the context of professional practice?
- Nuisance per se arises from activities declared unlawful by statute; nuisance in fact depends on circumstances (Correct answer)
- Nuisance per se requires proof of damages; nuisance in fact does not
- Nuisance per se applies only to residential projects; nuisance in fact to commercial ones
- Nuisance per se is a criminal offense; nuisance in fact is strictly civil
Correct answer: Nuisance per se arises from activities declared unlawful by statute; nuisance in fact depends on circumstances
A nuisance per se is an activity defined as a nuisance by law regardless of context, while a nuisance in fact is only a nuisance under the specific circumstances involved.
NPPE Tort Law and Negligence 4
In a negligence action against an architect, which element requires the plaintiff to show that the harm would not have occurred 'but for' the defendant's conduct?