Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
Multiple Choice
1. Tort suits generally come from:
a. customer carelessness or ignorance
b. unexpected instances of carelessness or bad behavior
c. failure to plan for unexpected catastrophes
d. natural disasters
e. repeated failure to comply with industry regulations
2. Most tort suits arise from:
a. customer ignorance
b. failure to plan for unexpected catastrophes
c. natural disasters
d. repeated failure to comply with industry regulations
e. none of the other choices
3. Juries in tort cases often award large sums of money because:
a. all tort cases involve serious injury so compensation is always large
b. people on juries consistently dislike business
c. juries place a high value on the enforcement of legal rights
d. juries lack understanding of how much damages are worth
e. none of the other choices
4. Juries in tort cases often award large sums of money because:
a. all tort cases involve serious injury so compensation is always large
b. people on juries consistently dislike business
c. juries lack understanding of how much damages are worth
d. large damages payments will make businesses less likely to repeat their mistakes
e. none of the other choices
5. The law of torts reflects:
a. community standards
b. social values
c. the current business environment
d. traditional standards
e. all of the other choices
6. The law of torts reflects all EXCEPT:
a. social values
b. community standards
c. the way we deal with each other in the current environment
d. the international perspective on liability
e. none of the other choices
7. A tort is:
a. negligent injury that can result in fines or imprisonment for less than one year
b. a criminal act
c. a felony
d. a civil wrong not a breach of contract
e. none of the other choices
8. A tort is:
a. negligent injury that can result in fines or imprisonment for less than one year
b. a criminal act
c. a felony
d. a breach of contract
e. none of the other choices
9. A tort is:
a. a breach of a duty owed to another that causes harm
b. a public law
c. designed to criminally punish wrongdoers
d. a wrong defined by Congress
e. a legal wrong defined by state legislatures
10. A tort is NOT:
a. a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract
b. a breach of duty owned to another that causes harm
c. a criminal act
d. conduct that unreasonably interferes with the interests of another
e. none of the other choices
11. Tort law can be classified as:
a. negligent
b. intentional
c. strict liability
d. all of the other choices
e. none of the other specific choices
12. A major purpose of tort law is to:
a. replace the insurance industry
b. provide compensation for injured parties by wrongdoers
c. impose criminal penalties on the negligent
d. ensure Equal Protection of the 14th Amendment is operational
e. ensure the effective operation of the Due Process Clause
13. A major purpose of tort law is to:
a. replace the insurance industry
b. impose criminal penalties on the negligent
c. adequately regulate government contracting
d. ensure the effective operation of the Due Process Clause
e. none of the other choices
14. Tort law does NOT:
a. impose criminal penalties on the negligent
b. ensure the effective operation of the Due Process Clause
c. replace the insurance industry
d. ensure Equal Protection of the 14th Amendment is operational
e. all of the other choices
15. To have a case in tort, the injury sustained by a person must be:
a. unreasonably sustained
b. the consequence of the wrongdoing of another
c. criminal in nature
d. based on a privity relationship
e. none of the other choices
16. A business can become involved in a tort action:
a. if an individual is harmed or injured by the actions of the business or its employees
b. if an individual is injured by a product produced by the business
c. if a business harms another business
d. all of the specific other choices
e. none of the other specific choices
17. A business can become involved in tort action in all of the following ways EXCEPT:
a. a person I harmed by the actions of a business
b. a person is harmed by the actions of a business's employees
c. a person is harmed by a product manufactured or distributed by a business
d. a business is harmed by the wrongful actions of another business or person
e. an employee commits a felony unrelated to his place of employment
18. In a tort action:
a. a party whose interests have been injured sues the party allegedly responsible
b. a person or property has suffered injury as a consequence of the actions of another
c. The injury to a person or property is legally the consequence of the actions of another
d. all of the other specific choices
e. none of the other specific choices
19. A criminal case differs from a tort case because:
a. in a criminal case the victim does not receive compensation
b. in a criminal case the victim is a witness
c. a criminal case is brought against the alleged wrongdoer by the government
d. all of the specific answer choices
e. none of the other specific choices
20. In contrast to a criminal case, in a tort case:
a. the victim is the plaintiff
b. the victim is a witness
c. the victim does not receive compensation for injuries, but the wrongdoer may have to pay restitution
d. the case is brought to court by the government
e. the case is based on the alleged wrongdoer violating a rule imposed by the legislature
21. In contrast to a criminal case, in a tort case:
a. the alleged wrongdoer is being tried by the government
b. the victim is only a witness, not a party to the case
c. the victim does not receive compensation for injuries, but the wrongdoer may have to pay restitution
d. the case is brought to court by the government
e. none of the other specific choices
22. The tort that protects individuals from harm based on careless and unintentional conduct of others is called:
a. conversion
b. negligence
c. strict liability
d. absolute liability
e. none of the other choices
23. The tort that protects individuals from harm based on careless and unintentional conduct of others is called:
a. conversion
b. strict liability
c. absolute liability
d. several liability
e. none of the other choices
24. Which of the following torts protect individuals from harm from the unintentional but legally careless conduct of
others:
a. strict liability
b. hazardous liability
c. nuisance
d. negligence
e. all of the other choices
25. Which of the following torts protect individuals from harm from the unintentional but legally careless conduct of
others:
a. strict liability
b. hazardous liability
c. nuisance
d. conversion
e. none of the other choices
26. Torts based on negligence protect people from:
a. harm from others' unintentional but legally careless conduct
b. willful disregard for customer safety
c. accidental consumer injury due to the misuse of a product
d. all of the specific choices
e. none of the other specific choices
27. Negligence torts are based on the idea that:
a. we have a duty to conduct ourselves in all situations so as not to create an unreasonable risk of harm or
injury to others
b. society owes victims of accidents compensation
c. businesses make more money than individuals and so are financially capable of compensating victims of
accidents
d. if business are not held responsible for injuries caused by carelessness they will become even more careless
e. none of the other specific choices
28. Which is not a necessary element of negligence?
a. a causal connection between the wrongdoer's negligent behavior and the resulting harm to the injured party
b. the wrongdoer owed the injured party a duty of care
c. the wrongdoer's actions were motivated by malice
d. the wrongdoer breached a duty of care to the injured party
e. the injured party suffered actual harm or damage as a result of the wrongdoer's conduct
29. Which of the following is not an element needed to show negligence:
a. the wrongdoer owed a duty of care to the injured party
b. a duty of care owed to the injured party was breached by an act of the wrongdoer
c. the injured party suffered harm from legally careless conduct
d. there is a causal connection between the injured party's harm and the wrongdoer's conduct
e. all of the other choices are necessary elements
30. Which of the following is not an element needed to show negligence:
a. the wrongdoer owed a duty of care to the injured party
b. a duty of care owed to the injured party was breached by an act of the wrongdoer
c. the wrongdoer intended to invade a protected interest of the injured party
d. there is a causal connection between the injured party's harm and the wrongdoer's conduct
e. all of the other choices are necessary elements
31. Negligence is:
a. an act that results in harm to another to whom the person owes a duty of care
b. an omission that results in harm to another to whom the person owes a duty of care
c. a willful omission of material information that leads to injury
d. choices a and b
e. choices a, b and c
32. Conduct is likely to be held to be negligent if:
a. it results in misappropriation
b. it creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others
c. it results in profits for a business at the expense of its employees
d. it creates incentives for people to harm others' property
e. none of the other choices
33. Negligence torts differ from intentional torts in that:
a. the government is the prosecutor in negligence torts
b. the victim does not receive compensation in a negligence tort case
c. in negligence the harmful results of a person's conduct are not intentional
d. intentional torts are also felonies
e. none of the other choices
34. With regard to torts, New Zealand differs from the United States in that:
a. events classified as torts in the United States do not occur in New Zealand
b. tort cases result in much higher payments to New Zealand victims than to US victims
c. events classified as torts in the United States occur, but personal injury suits for damages are not allowed
d. New Zealanders do not bring tort cases because of their history as a British colony
e. none of the other choices
35. With regard to torts, New Zealand differs from the United States in that:
a. events classified as torts in the United States do not occur in New Zealand
b. tort cases result in much higher payments to New Zealand victims than to US victims
c. tort cases occur in New Zealand, but result in much lower compensation payments
d. New Zealanders do not bring tort cases because of their history as a British colony
e. none of the other choices
36. With regard to torts, New Zealand differs from the United States in that:
a. personal injury tort suits are not allowed
b. personal injury tort suits must be filed within three days of the alleged harm occurring
c. personal injury tort suits have a maximum damage award
d. New Zealand tort law does not differ in any significant way
e. none of the other choices
37. With regard to torts, New Zealand differs from the United States in that:
a. personal injury tort suits are not allowed
b. there are no mega-damage awards
c. injured parties are compensated from a social insurance fund
d. all of the other specific choices
e. none of the other specific choices
38. The reasonable person standard compares the actions of the wrongdoer/tortfeasor with those of a hypothetical
person known as the reasonable person. The standard of care that the law presumes the reasonable person meets
is:
a. ordinary care or due care
b. extraordinary care
c. minimal care
d. the law presumes no particular standard of care; each case is evaluated individually
e. none of the other choices
39. Ordinary care or due care is a standard of care that the law presumes:
a. the expert person meets
b. the average person meets
c. the business owner meets
d. the reasonable person meets
e. the standard person meets
40. Ordinary care or due care is a standard of care that the law presumes:
a. the expert person meets
b. the standard person meets
c. the business owner meets
d. the average person meets
e. none of the other choices
41. The reasonable person standard compares the actions of the wrongdoer/tortfeasor with those of a hypothetical
person known as the reasonable person. The reasonable person:
a. represents a standard of how the average American citizen ought to behave
b. represents a standard of how the average business CEO ought to behave
c. represents a standard of how middle class Americans ought to behave
d. represents a standard of how all voting-age Americans ought to behave
e. represents a standard of how persons in the relevant community ought to behave
42. In a case in which a doctor is sued for negligence due to an accidentally botched surgery, the reasonable person
standard would be that of:
a. a reasonably skilled, competent and experienced doctor
b. a recent graduate from medical school
c. a high school biology teacher
d. an average American
e. none of the other choices
43. In a case in which a doctor is sued for negligence due to an accidentally botched surgery, the reasonable person
standard would be that of:
a. an average college graduate
b. a recent graduate from medical school
c. a high school biology teacher
d. an average American
e. none of the other choices
44. To determine if a person's conduct was negligent, one asks:
a. what would the victim's best friend have done under the same or similar circumstances?
b. what would the victim's mother have done under the same or similar circumstances?
c. what would the victim have done under the same or similar circumstances?
d. what would a reasonable, qualified person have done under the same or similar circumstances?
e. none of the other choices
45. A person has acted negligently if:
a. they were incapable of reaching the victim before the harm occurred
b. they tried to prevent the harm, but could not due to a lack of professional knowledge
c. their conduct was not that of a reasonable person
d. they admit to not liking the victim
e. none of the other choices
46. A person has acted negligently if:
a. they were incapable of reaching the victim before the harm occurred
b. they tried to prevent the harm, but could not due to a lack of professional knowledge
c. they were not present at the time of the injury
d. they admit to not liking the victim
e. none of the other specific choices
47. Tort law makes every individual:
a. responsible for every injury related to actions
b. responsible for injuries that they witness
c. responsible for injuries that they cause, but could not prevent
d. all of the other specific choices
e. none of the other specific choices
48. In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as claimed, the appeals
court held that the claim of negligent misrepresentation:
a. failed because the defendant only recommended a product made by another company
b. failed because the defendant obtained no financial gain by the bad decision
c. failed because the plaintiff is a sophisticated business and could evaluate the product
d. could proceed because the defendant may have negligently provided false information
e. could proceed because the defendant intended to extract a large payment from the plaintiff based on false
information
49. In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as claimed, the appeals
court held that the claim of negligent misrepresentation:
a. failed because the defendant only recommended a product made by another company
b. failed because the defendant obtained no financial gain by the bad decision
c. failed because the plaintiff is a sophisticated business that could evaluate the product
d. could proceed because the defendant intended to extract a large payment from the plaintiff based on false
information
e. none of the other choices
50. In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product
packaging, the company that bought the adhesive sued the seller for a tort called:
a. defamation
b. fraud
c. intentional misrepresentation
d. negligent misrepresentation
e. none of the other choices
51. In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product
packaging, the company that bought the adhesive sued the seller for a tort called:
a. defamation
b. fraud
c. intentional misrepresentation
d. conversion
e. none of the other choices
52. In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product
packaging, Squish La Fish sued the adhesive seller for negligent misrepresentation because:
a. Squish La Fish was the foreseeable user of Thomco's representations concerning the adhesive
b. Squish La Fish felt that Thomco gave false information about the adhesive's removability
c. Squish La Fish felt that it relied on Thomco's false information about the adhesive
d. all of the specific choices
e. none of the specific choices
53. In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product
packaging, Squish La Fish sued the adhesive seller for negligent misrepresentation because:
a. Squish La Fish could not use the adhesive because it was the wrong color
b. Squish La Fish felt that Thomco gave false information about the adhesive's removability
c. Thomco raised the price of the adhesive after Squish La Fish agreed to buy it
d. all of the specific choices
e. none of the specific choices
54. In Squish La Fish v. Thomco Specialty Products, involving an adhesive that did not work as hoped in product
packaging, Squish La Fish sued the adhesive seller for negligent misrepresentation because:
a. Squish La Fish could not use the adhesive because it was toxic
b. Thomco raised the price of the adhesive after Squish La Fish agreed to buy it
c. Squish La Fish felt that it relied on Thomco's false information about the adhesive and suffered economic
losses as a result
d. all of the specific choices
e. none of the specific choices
55. In a tort of negligence, causation is:
a. a basic element linking one party's act and another's injury
b. an unimportant element that helps determine the final compensation amount
c. the key to establishing whether the alleged wrongdoer acted in a reasonable manner
d. all of the other specific choices
e. none of the other choices
56. Suppose a surgeon is sued for negligence by a patient for having accidentally botched an operation. The standard
that applies to the surgeon is the reasonable person, which means:
a. strict liability
b. the care expected of a skilled surgeon under the circumstances
c. the care expected of a reasonable person under the circumstances
d. the care expected of any person under the circumstances
e. none of the other choices; negligence law does not apply to physicians
57. Suppose a surgeon is sued for negligence by a patient for having accidentally botched an operation. The standard
that applies to the surgeon is the reasonable person, which means:
a. strict liability
b. the care expected of any ordinary person under the circumstances
c. proximate cause is established res ipsa loquitur
d. none of the other choices; surgeons are exempt from liability
e. none of the other choices
58. The term res ipsa loquitur means:
a. an event was the cause in fact
b. an event was the proximate cause of an injury
c. the thing speaks to the court
d. the thing speaks for itself
e. none of the other choices
