WA Bar Washington Torts

Question 1

Under Washington's comparative fault statute (RCW 4.22.070), when are multiple defendants jointly and severally liable to a plaintiff?

Accepted Answer

When the claimant's total fault is zero, or when defendants acted in concert or in an agency relationship

Answer

Always, regardless of the plaintiff's comparative fault

Answer

When any single defendant is more than 50% at fault for the plaintiff's injuries

Answer

Never — Washington applies pure several liability in all cases

Question 2

What is the general statute of limitations for personal injury tort claims in Washington state?

Accepted Answer

3 years from the date of injury

Answer

1 year from the date of injury

Answer

2 years from the date of injury

Answer

4 years from the date of injury

Question 3

Under Washington law, how does implied (secondary) assumption of the risk function after the state's adoption of comparative fault?

Accepted Answer

As a factor assigned a percentage of fault that reduces but does not eliminate the plaintiff's recovery

Answer

As a complete bar to the plaintiff's recovery in all circumstances

Answer

As an absolute defense that negates the defendant's duty of care

Answer

As a defense available only in cases involving intentional torts

Question 4

Which of the following best states Washington's 'eggshell plaintiff' (thin skull) rule?

Accepted Answer

A defendant takes the plaintiff as they find them and is liable for the full extent of harm even if the severity was unforeseeable

Answer

A defendant is liable only for foreseeable types and extents of harm

Answer

A plaintiff's recovery is reduced proportionally when a pre-existing condition contributed to the injury

Answer

A defendant is not liable for harm primarily caused by a pre-existing condition

Question 5

In Washington, what must a bystander establish to bring a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) after witnessing injury to a family member?

Accepted Answer

The bystander must be a close family member who contemporaneously perceived the serious injury or death of the primary victim caused by the defendant

Answer

The bystander must have suffered a physical impact from the defendant's conduct

Answer

The bystander must have been within the zone of danger and feared for their own safety

Answer

The bystander must have a pre-existing diagnosed psychiatric disorder

Question 6

Under Washington law, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur permits a plaintiff to:

Accepted Answer

Establish a permissible inference of negligence without direct proof of the specific negligent act

Answer

Automatically obtain a directed verdict without presenting any evidence of negligence

Answer

Shift the entire burden of proof to the defendant to disprove negligence

Answer

Recover without proving causation whenever the defendant had exclusive control

Question 7

Which of the following best describes how Washington applies the 'firefighter's rule' in tort law?

Accepted Answer

Professional rescuers generally cannot recover in negligence for risks inherent to their profession that necessitated their response

Answer

Firefighters can recover for all on-duty injuries regardless of how the risk arose

Answer

Firefighters have a strict liability claim against property owners who negligently started fires

Answer

The firefighter's rule has been abolished by Washington statute