A few minutes later a train approached. The engineer saw the man on the track and
could have stopped, but the train’s brakes were defective. As a result, the train hit and
killed the man. His family is suing the railroad for negligence in a state that follows the
contributory negligence doctrine. In this case,
a. the patient has assumed the risk of wandering onto the railroad tracks.
b. because the patient was contributorily negligent, the railroad has no liability.
c. the train had the last clear chance to avoid the accident, so the patient’s contributory
negligence does not bar his estate’s recovery.
d. the train’s striking of the man was an intervening cause, so the railroad company was
negligent.
The Bill of Rights applies directly to the states.
a. True
b. False
In the Bigelow-Sanford, Inc. v. Gunny Corp. case, the court found:
a. the buyer did not purchase substitute goods in good faith and without unreasonable
delay.
b. the Code permits a buyer to cover by buying substitute goods if the buyer acts in