Law Multiple Choice

1. Which of the following do courts often consider in determining whether a manufacturer was negligent in failing to warn?
A. The likelihood of the injury.
B. The likelihood of the injury, the seriousness of the injury and the ease of warning.
C. The seriousness of the injury.
D. The ease of warning only.

2. Under which of the following theories of product liability can a plaintiff recover solely for economic damage?
A. Strict liability and breach of warranty, but not product responsibility
B. Strict liability
C. Product responsibility
D. Breach of warranty

3. Clint, a well-known TV reporter, was investigating a story about a man’s death. He interviewed police who stated that they thought it was the man’s friend. When Clint reported the story, he stated that the police stated that the friend was the prime suspect. In fact, the police just ruled out the friend, but Clint hadn’t yet been informed of that fact. The next day, the friend was fired.
A. Clint is not guilty of defamation owing to a qualified privilege.
B. Clint is guilty of libel for telling a lie that caused injury to the friend.
C. Clint is guilty of slander for telling a lie that caused injury to the friend.
D. Clint is not guilty of defamation due to an absolute privilege.

4. Which of the following are considered foreseeable plaintiffs in product liability cases?
A. Users, consumers and bystanders.
B. The purchaser only.
C. Users and consumers but not bystanders.
D. Users but not consumers or bystanders.

5. As Reggie was driving, he spilled his hot coffee. This caused him to hit another car, which then ran into a utility pole, knocking it down, and causing a power outage in the area. It took the utility company several days to restore electricity to the area. Martin sued Reggie because all the food in his refrigerator spoiled due to the power outage. What will the result be?
A. Reggie will not be liable to Martin because his conduct was not the proximate cause of Martin’s damages.
B. Reggie will be liable to Martin because he should have foreseen that taking his eyes off the road could cause Martin’s food to spoil.
C. Reggie will not be liable to Martin because he could not have actually foreseen that it was dangerous to take one’s eyes off the road to find one’s phone.
D. Reggie will be liable to Martin because a person is liable for all consequences of the person’s negligence.

6. Which of the following is not true of strict liability?
A. Intent to injure does not have to be proven.
B. It is based on state law.
C. It primarily applies in defective product and abnormally dangerous situations.
D. Injury need not occur or be proven.

7. Which of the following is true regarding the duty that a business owes to customer?
A. A business has a duty of care to protect their customers against foreseeable risks about which
the owner knew or reasonably should have known.
B. A business owes an absolute duty to keep its customers safe and is strictly liable for any
harm.
C. A business owes a negligence per se duty toward customers.
D. A business owes no duty to its customers other than to sell safe products.

8. While Ron was driving, he had an unexpected stroke causing him to hit a pedestrian crossing the
street. Which of the following is true?
A. It is unlikely that the pedestrian can recover because the accident could not have been avoided even with reasonable care.
B. The pedestrian can recover only if it can be shown that Ron had insurance.
C. The pedestrian can recover upon a showing of injury. Nothing else is required.
D. The pedestrian may recover only if the pedestrian can show that the pedestrian was in the marked crosswalk.

9. Which of the following would constitute the privacy tort of false light?
A. Disclosing private facts about a person.
B. Attributing characteristics or beliefs to a person that he or she does not possess.
C. Defaming a public figure for personal gain.
D. All of the above.

10. In a products liability case, the plaintiff may pursue legal remedies against the seller under any of
the following categories except:
A. strict liability.
B. product disparagement.
C. warranty.
D. negligence.

11. Buford is a city councilman. While at a party he commented that another city councilman, Carl, is an alcoholic. A reporter overheard this statement and included it in an article that he published in a widely circulated newspaper. Carl’s reputation was damaged. Was Buford guilty of defamation?
A. Yes, he has committed slander.
B. No, he has an absolute privilege as a government official.
C. No, he didn’t disseminate the information to a third party, the reporter did.
D. Yes, he has committed libel.

12. Which of the following scenarios would most likely result in strict liability?
A. Allan was injured when a foul ball entered the stands at a game and hit him.
B. Allan owned a dog that escaped from his yard and bit a neighbor.
C. Allan bought a pizza and broke a tooth when he bit into a stone.
D. Allan is a maintenance man at a local store. He waxed the floors but failed to put up warning signs. A customer slipped and was injured.

13. Which of the following situations is not a situation in which strict liability applies?
A. Dave sells food from a food truck in the business district.
B. Dave owns a pet zebra that he keeps in his home in a suburban neighborhood.
C. Dave owns a business in which he regularly uses dangerous chemicals.
D. Dave manufactures cheap bikes that fall apart after minimal use.

14. In which of the following situations would res ipsa loquitur likely apply?
A. Marvin was driving 20 miles over the speed limit and caused an accident.
B. Marvin came up behind someone and knocked the person down.
C. A train derailed and the cause of the accident can’t be proven.
D. Marvin forgot to put a sign up to warn people that the floor had just been washed and was slippery.

15. Which of the following is true regarding contributory negligence?
A. It was once available in all states but has been replaced in some states by the defense of comparative negligence.
B. It is available in all states today.
C. It was once available in all states and has been replaced in some states by the defense of assumption of risk.
D. None of the above
16. Donald ran a successful computer repair store. Warren, who is a very wealthy individual, was angry with Donald and decided to open a computer repair store next door solely to run Donald out of business. Which of the following is correct?
A. Warren has committed the tort of disparagement.
B. Warren has committed the tort of interference with contract.
C. Warren has not committed any tort.
D. Warren has committed the tort of unfair competition.

17. Why are punitive damages awarded?
A. To punish the offender only.
B. To punish the offender and to deter others from committing similar offenses.
C. To deter others from committing similar offenses only.
D. To punish the offender, to deter others from committing similar offenses and to reimburse a plaintiff for his or her losses.

18. Which of the following may be sued in product liability actions?
A. Retailers and wholesalers but not manufacturers.
B. Retailers, wholesalers, and manufacturers.
C. Retailers and manufacturers but not wholesalers.
D. Wholesalers and manufacturers but not retailers.

19. Which of the following are factors the trial court may find helpful when balancing a product’s
utility against the risk the product creates?
A. The usefulness and desirability of the product.
B. The manufacturer’s ability to eliminate the unsafe character of the product without impairing its usefulness or making it too expensive to maintain its utility
C. The availability of a substitute product that would meet the same need and would not be as unsafe.
D. All of the above.

20. Alvin began to cross the street in a jurisdiction that applies contributory negligence. He did not use a crosswalk but proceeded to illegally cross the street without even checking to see if any vehicles were coming. Vinnie saw Alvin in the street, noticed that he is not in the crosswalk, and intentionally hit Alvin with his vehicle because he believed that Alvin should be taught a lesson about how to cross the street. However, Vinnie did slow down somewhat and only caused Alvin some significant bruising, but Alvin is angry and sued. Which of the following is most likely to happen in a contributory negligence jurisdiction?
A. Vinnie will win because of the assumption of risk doctrine.
B. Alvin will be able to recover despite proof of contributory negligence on his part because
Vinnie had a final clear opportunity to avoid the action that injured Alvin.
C. Vinnie will not be held liable because Alvin was contributorily negligent.
D. Alvin will win because of comparative negligence.

21. Ziggy admired Clarissa for a long time but was too shy to talk to her. One day Ziggy approached
Clarissa, who had her back to him and didn’t know he was there, and gave her a hug. Ziggy
apologized and went away. Clarissa was surprised, but physically unharmed. Ziggy has committed:
A. intentional infliction of emotional distress.
B. battery.
C. nothing, because he apologized and she was unharmed.
D. conversion.

22. After everyone else had gone home for the day, Artie’s manager, Carl, called Artie into his office.
Carl closed the door and told Artie that he is a thief and that he must return the items that he stole
from the company. In fact, Artie never stole anything. Artie became extremely upset and sick.
A. Carl has committed libel.
B. Carl has committed slander.
C. Carl has committed disparagement.
D. Carl has not committed a defamation tort.

23. The fact that the actual negligent act must directly cause the injury is called the:
A. cause in fact.
B. proximate cause.
C. tortfeasance.
D. misfeasance.

24. Which of the following must a plaintiff generally show in order to recover in a product liability
lawsuit?
A. That the product is defective, that the defect existed when the product left the defendant’s
control and also that the defendant was negligent.
B. That the product is defective and also that the defect existed when the product left the defendant’s control.
C. That the product is defective.
D. That the defect should have been discovered and fixed prior to sale.

25. Under which of the following theories may a plaintiff be able to proceed even if the plaintiff
cannot trace an injury caused by a product to any particular manufacturer?
A. The shared liability theory.
B. The shared market liability theory.
C. The shared production theory.
D. The market share theory.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A GOOD DISCOUNT