FREE CLA/CP Torts: Negligence and Liability Questions and Answers

Question 1

A driver, distracted by a text message, runs a red light and strikes a pedestrian who was crossing the street legally. The pedestrian suffers a broken leg and incurs significant medical bills. In a negligence claim against the driver, the act of running the red light while distracted primarily represents which element?

Accepted Answer

Breach of Duty

Answer

The driver had a legal duty to operate the vehicle with reasonable care. Texting while driving and running a red light is a failure to meet that standard of care, thus constituting a breach of that duty. The broken leg represents damages, and the link between the breach and the injury is causation.

Question 2

A delivery driver for a national courier service negligently causes a car accident while on a scheduled delivery route. The injured party sues both the driver and the courier company. On what legal theory is the courier company most likely to be held liable for its driver's negligence?

Accepted Answer

Respondeat Superior

Answer

The doctrine of respondeat superior, a form of vicarious liability, holds an employer legally responsible for the wrongful acts of an employee if such acts occur within the scope of their employment. [7, 8, 15] Since the driver was performing their job duties, the employer can be held liable.

Question 3

Which of the following situations is most likely to be governed by the principles of strict liability?

Accepted Answer

A company that uses dynamite for quarrying operations causes damage to a nearby home from the concussions, despite taking all reasonable safety precautions.

Answer

Strict liability is imposed for activities that are considered inherently or abnormally dangerous (ultrahazardous), regardless of the level of care taken. [5, 13, 20] The use of explosives is a classic example of such an activity. The other options describe situations governed by negligence, where a failure to exercise reasonable care must be proven.

Question 4

In a jurisdiction that follows the doctrine of pure comparative negligence, a plaintiff is found to be 70% at fault for their own injuries in an accident, and the defendant is 30% at fault. The plaintiff's total damages are $200,000. What is the likely outcome?

Accepted Answer

The plaintiff will recover $60,000.

Answer

Under a pure comparative negligence system, a plaintiff's recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault, no matter how high it is. [2, 10, 21] Therefore, the plaintiff can recover the portion of damages for which the defendant was at fault (30% of $200,000), which amounts to $60,000.

Question 5

A patient undergoes abdominal surgery and weeks later experiences severe pain. An X-ray reveals that a surgical clamp was left inside their body. The patient has no way of knowing which specific member of the surgical team was responsible. Which legal doctrine would be most useful for the plaintiff to establish negligence?

Accepted Answer

Res ipsa loquitur

Answer

Res ipsa loquitur, Latin for 'the thing speaks for itself,' is a doctrine that allows an inference of negligence when the event is of a kind that does not ordinarily occur without negligence, the defendant had exclusive control over the instrumentality causing the injury, and the plaintiff did not contribute to the injury. [1, 3, 6] It is often applied in cases like this where direct evidence of the negligent act is unavailable to the plaintiff.

CLA/CP Exam Practice Test

CLA/CP Exam Practice Test

FREE CLA/CP Torts: Negligence and Liability Questions and Answers