Pennsylvania Bar (UBE) VIP Practice Exam

A homeowner hired a contractor to resurface her driveway. The contractor negligently left an unmarked pile of gravel near the edge of the road at dusk. A cyclist, riding at a reasonable speed but wearing dark clothing, hit the gravel pile and was injured. The contractor argues the cyclist's dark clothing was the proximate cause of the injury. Under the majority rule for negligence, which of the following best describes the legal outcome? (A) The contractor is not liable because the cyclist assumed the risk by riding at dusk in dark clothing. (B) The contractor is liable only if the cyclist's dark clothing was not a superseding cause of the injury. (C) The contractor is liable because leaving unmarked gravel on a public road created a foreseeable risk of harm to cyclists, and the cyclist's conduct was at most a contributing factor. (D) The contractor is not liable because the harm was unforeseeable given the cyclist's own negligence.

Questions 2–29 and full explanations are VIP-exclusive.