A) The statement is true.
B) The statement was said on private property.
C) The defendant did not know the plaintiff.
D) The plaintiff was not present when the statement was made.
E) The statement was made in a contributory negligence jurisdiction.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Assumption of the risk.
B) Last-clear-chance.
C) Modified comparative negligence.
D) Pure comparative negligence.
E) Both modified comparative negligence and last-clear-chance.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Negligence of the spoken word.
B) Negligence of the person.
C) Negligence in or of itself.
D) Absolute wrongdoing.
E) Permissible negligence.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Neither Wendy nor Sam had a duty to go to the aid of the divers who were in peril.
B) Wendy and Sam had a duty to go to the aid of the divers in peril only if Mike refused to do so.
C) Wendy and Sam did not have a duty to go to the aid of the divers in peril unless they were the first to see the problem.
D) Wendy and Sam had a duty to assist the divers in peril only if they were acquainted prior to the dive with the divers who were in peril.They had no duty to help strangers.
E) Sam and Wendy had a duty to help the divers who were in peril if personal safety was involved but not if the only issue was damage to property.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) proximate
B) legal
C) actual
D) nominal
E) exemplary
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Pain and suffering.
B) Costs of repairing damaged property.
C) Medical expenses.
D) Attorney fees.
E) Lost wages.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Libel.
B) Slander.
C) Both libel and slander.
D) Neither libel nor slander,because an editorial was involved.
E) Neither libel nor slander,because the falsehood involved matters of appearance not business-related matters.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) slander of quality
B) trade libel
C) libel of title
D) slander of title
E) negligent interference with contractual relations
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Tina has no legal duty to come to Susie's aid.
B) Tina has a legal duty to come to Susie's aid because she negligently hit her.
C) Tina has a legal duty to come to Susie's aid,but only if police do not arrive on the scene within a reasonable amount of time.
D) Tina has a legal duty to come to Susie's aid,but only if Susie has no medical insurance.
E) Tina has a legal duty to come to Susie's aid,but only if no one without a conflict of interest is willing to do so.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Actual causation would exist because the bank would not have been damaged if Holly had fulfilled her duty to drive properly.
B) Actual cause is present because as a matter of policy,it is believed that someone who rear-ends a vehicle should be responsible for damages.
C) Actual cause is present because Holly was the legal cause of the bank burning.
D) Actual cause is not present because Holly is not the legal cause of the bank burning.
E) Actual cause is not present because Holly is not the proximate cause of the bank burning.
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) A written poster hanging in the school cafeteria which states that the principal stole money from the school treasury.
B) Calling someone professionally incompetent.
C) Telling another person that someone has a loathsome,communicable disease.
D) Stating that another student has committed a crime for which imprisonment is possible.
E) Informing classmates that a female student in your business law class has engaged in sexual misconduct.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) When a person causes an object to be placed on the land of another without the landowner's permission.
B) When a person stays on the land of another once the owner tells him to depart.
C) When a person refuses to remove something he placed on the property that the owner of the property asked him remove.
D) When a person causes an object to be placed on the land of another without the landowner's permission,when a person stays on the land of another when the owner tells him to depart,and when a person refuses to remove something he placed on the property that the owner of the property asked him remove.
E) None of these,because a person does not commit trespass to realty unless it can be established that the person initially entered the land of another without permission.
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) Assumption of the risk.
B) Comparative negligence.
C) Res ipsa loquitur.
D) Negligence per se.
E) Res ipsa loquitur and negligence per se.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) reasonable person
B) subjective juror
C) beyond reproach
D) perfect accountability
E) reasonable accountability
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) He will win because Mike should have warned him about the occasional appearance of sharks.
B) He will lose because Mike had no duty to warn him of anything.
C) He will lose because he did not sustain physical injury.
D) He will win,but only if he can establish that he had a contract with Mike whereby Mike would reveal harmful conditions.
E) He will win,but only if he can establish that he did not have insurance to cover the equipment.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The activity involves negligence.
B) The activity involves trespassing.
C) The activity is undertaken by a minor.
D) The activity is so inherently dangerous that it cannot ever be safely undertaken.
E) The activity is heavily regulated.
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 1 - 20 of 126
Related Exams