1. Which of the following is not one of the elements a plaintiff in a negligence case must prove?
a.
The existence of a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff
b.
A breach of duty to act reasonably
c.
The financial circumstances of the defendant
d.
An injury suffered by the plaintiff
2. To whom does the hotel owe the least duty?
a.
An invitee
c.
A trespasser
b.
A licensee
d.
A visitor of a guest
3. Which of the following means, “the thing speaks for itself”?
a.
Attractive nuisance doctrine
c.
Negligence per se
b.
Res ipsa loquitur
d.
Last clear chance
4. Which of the following is not true concerning young people?
a.
A young child who is negligent will not be liable for any injuries caused thereby.
b.
The standard of care owed to young guests by a hotel that accepts children as guests is
impacted by their inexperience and impulsive nature.
c.
Because parents are required to care for their children, the duty of care owed to children is
the same as that of adults.
d.
The doctrine of attractive nuisance applies to children.
5. A restaurant patron was injured when she fell on icy steps. The steps did not have a railing. Had a
railing been present, the patron could have stopped her fall. The local laws applicable to buildings
mandated that all steps have railings on both sides. Which of the following will apply in this case?
a.
Negligence per se doctrine
c.
Contributory negligence
b.
Res ipsa loquitur
d.
Attractive nuisance
6. The legal doctrine that imposes liability on a defendant even when the defendant is not negligent is:
a.
Comparative negligence
c.
Last clear chance
b.
Strict liability
d.
Contributory negligence
7. Which of the following is not an objective of the doctrine of respondeat superior?
a.
It helps to ensure that the plaintiff will have a financially secure defendant.
b.
It assists low-paid employees in handling legal liability.
c.
It encourages employers to exercise caution in the selection of employees.
d.
It encourages employers to train their employees well.
8. A waitress at a restaurant, while checking on her tables, observed a diner choking. Is the waitress
legally obligated to aid the choking diner?
a.
No, and if she does and is negligent, the restaurant will not be liable.
b.
Yes, and if she does not, the restaurant will be liable.
c.
No, but if she does and is negligent, the restaurant will be liable.
d.
Yes, and if she does, the restaurant will not be liable even if the waitress is grossly
negligent.
9. Which of the following is a risk that is assumed?
a.
The risk that a person playing tennis will be hit by a ball in play
b.
The risk that a person playing racquetball may fall in a hole on the court
c.
The risk that a ski trail will have a small bush on it
d.
The risk that a paddleboat at a hotel has a hole in it, causing the boat to slowly sink
10. A patron was injured at a restaurant. Both the restaurant and the patron were negligent. If the
restaurant is located in a state that follows the comparative negligence rule, which of the following is
true?
a.
The restaurant will have no liability, and the patron’s case will be dismissed.
b.
The restaurant will be fully liable for the injuries.
c.
The jury will allocate the liability between the patron and the restaurant; the patron will
collect a percentage of liability attributed to the restaurant.
d.
The restaurant will be fully liable for the loss and will be required to pay punitive damages
as well.
1. A hotel is an ensurer of guests’ safety.
2. The legal duty we have to act reasonably is owed to everyone.
3. If a plaintiff in a negligence case is unable to prove proximate cause, the plaintiff will lose the case and
not be able to recover.
4. Proximate cause is a direct and foreseeable connection between the duty owed and the breach of that
duty.
5. Due to a hotel’s negligence, an entertainer broke her leg and was unable to perform as scheduled at a
sold-out concert. The promoter of the concert sued the hotel in negligence to recover its loss. True or
false: The hotel will be liable to the promoter for the loss.
6. A restaurant’s duty to licensees requires that it inspect the premises for unsafe conditions and then
correct those conditions.
7. If the problem that caused injury to a diner at a restaurant could not have been discovered upon a
reasonable examination of the premises, the restaurant will not be liable for the injury.
8. The only duty owed by a hotel to a trespasser is to warn of those dangers about which the hotel is
aware.
9. From the time a visitor of a hotel guest enters the hotel until the visitor leaves, the visitor is legally
considered an invitee.
10. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur creates a rebuttable inference that the defendant was negligent.
11. A 5-year-old child’s negligence caused injury to a man. True or false: The child will be liable to the
man for his injuries.
12. A hotel guest went swimming alone in the hotel pool at 2:00 a.m. and drowned. He was not discovered
until 8:00 a.m. His family sued the hotel, claiming negligence per se because the hotel did not have a
shepard’s hook by the pool, as required by law. True or false: The doctrine of negligence per se will
result in liability of the hotel in this case.
13. A restaurant that complies with all the safety statutes and ordinances applicable to it will not be liable
for negligence regardless of how a patron is injured.
14. An employer is liable for the negligent acts of its employees.
15. An employer is never liable for the acts of independent contractors.
16. If assumption of risk applies, the defendant will not be liable.
1. ____________________ refers to many types of noncriminal wrongful conduct done by one person
and causing injury to another.
2. ____________________ is a breach of legal duty to act reasonably that is the direct or proximate
cause of injury to another.
3. For a plaintiff in a negligence case to succeed there must be a ______________________________
relationship between the injury and the unreasonable conduct.
4. The legal doctrine of _________________________ will benefit the plaintiff in a case where the
circumstances suggest that the defendant was negligent but no proof of specific acts of negligence
exists.
5. An ______________________________ is a potentially dangerous object or condition of exceptional
interest to young people.
6. The doctrine of ______________________________ imposes liability on the seller of a defective
product without regard to negligence.
7. ______________________________ are laws that protect a person from liability for all but gross
negligence where, in an emergency situation, the person tries to help a sick or injured person or
someone in peril.
8. In a case where both the plaintiff and defendant are negligent, the defendant will have no liability if the
state follows the rule of ______________________________.
1. Two precautions a hotel with mirrored or glass walls might take to avoid injury are
_______________________________________, _______________________________________.
2. The duty owed to licensees is
____________________________________________________________.
3. To win a lawsuit, the plaintiff must show what types of injuries?
1.#