NY Bar Torts 1 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: In New York, which standard of care applies when determining whether a defendant acted negligently?
- The standard of a reasonable person in the defendant's subjective circumstances
- The objective standard of a reasonably prudent person under similar circumstances (Correct answer)
- A heightened standard for all professional defendants
- The standard of the most cautious person in the community
Correct answer: The objective standard of a reasonably prudent person under similar circumstances
New York applies the objective reasonably prudent person standard in negligence cases, measuring conduct against what a reasonable person would have done under similar external circumstances.
Question 2: Under New York's pure comparative fault system, a plaintiff who is 70% at fault for their own injuries may recover:
- Nothing, because their fault exceeds 50%
- 30% of their total damages (Correct answer)
- 100% of their damages, reduced at the court's discretion
- 70% of their damages from the defendant
Correct answer: 30% of their total damages
New York follows pure comparative negligence, allowing plaintiffs to recover their proportionate share of damages regardless of their degree of fault—a 70% at-fault plaintiff recovers 30%.
Question 3: To establish a prima facie case for negligence, a plaintiff must prove all of the following EXCEPT:
- Duty of care owed by defendant to plaintiff
- Intentional conduct by the defendant (Correct answer)
- Breach of the duty of care
- Actual and proximate causation of damages
Correct answer: Intentional conduct by the defendant
Negligence does not require intent; the elements are duty, breach, causation, and damages—intent is the hallmark of intentional torts, not negligence.
Question 4: The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur allows a plaintiff to establish negligence by showing:
- Direct evidence of the defendant's careless conduct
- The injury is the type that ordinarily does not occur without negligence, the instrumentality was in defendant's control, and plaintiff did not contribute (Correct answer)
- Any accident caused by a defendant's product
- The defendant had a duty and caused harm
Correct answer: The injury is the type that ordinarily does not occur without negligence, the instrumentality was in defendant's control, and plaintiff did not contribute
Res ipsa loquitur permits an inference of negligence when the type of harm does not ordinarily occur without negligence, the instrumentality was under the defendant's exclusive control, and plaintiff was not at fault.
Question 5: Under New York law, a landowner owes what duty of care to a trespasser on their property?
- No duty whatsoever
- A duty not to willfully or wantonly injure a known trespasser (Correct answer)
- The same duty owed to all visitors
- A duty to warn of all known hazards
Correct answer: A duty not to willfully or wantonly injure a known trespasser
In New York, a landowner owes a trespasser only the duty to refrain from willful, wanton, or reckless conduct that injures them, though greater duties may apply to child trespassers under the attractive nuisance doctrine.
Question 6: In New York, strict products liability requires a plaintiff to prove that the product was:
- Made negligently by the manufacturer
- Defective in design, manufacturing, or warnings when it left the defendant's control (Correct answer)
- Used as the defendant intended at the time of injury
- Dangerous only to persons without special skills
Correct answer: Defective in design, manufacturing, or warnings when it left the defendant's control
Strict products liability in New York holds manufacturers and sellers liable for injuries caused by products that were defective in design, manufacture, or failure to warn when they left the seller's control.
NY Bar Torts 1
In New York, which standard of care applies when determining whether a defendant acted negligently?