Negligence And Liability Case

what letter is right

Cyril conveyed Cityacre to Olga. Cityacre was a corner lot in a residential area, but there was a lot of traffic on both of the streets bordering Cityacre because it was quite close to the central business district. When Olga took possession, Cityacre contained a modest home, in which Olga took up residence. There was a small hedge at the apex of the lot. During the course of the 20 years Olga lived on Cityacre, the hedge grew so large that it obstructed the view around the corner for motorists at the intersection of the streets bordering Cityacre. However, the city had made the intersection a four-way stop, and all of the stop signs were clearly visible to motorists. One afternoon two motorists, Donna and Edmund, were driving inattentively and each ran a stop sign at the intersection bordering Cityacre. Their cars collided in the intersection and both Donna and Edmund were injured. The jurisdiction in which Cityacre is located has adopted pure comparative negligence. If Edmund sues Donna for his injuries, what is the likely result? A. Edmund wins, if his percentage of fault is less than Donna’s. B. Edmund loses, unless Donna had the last clear chance to avoid the accident. C. Donna wins, because Edmund ran the stop sign. D. Donna loses, regardless of whether Edmund’s fault was greater or less than Donna’s.

Mildred Minor was a three-year-old child attending nursery school. Tom Tease, who attended the same nursery school, teased Mildred every day because she wore glasses. One day when Tom’s teasing was particularly vicious, Mildred slugged Tom in the face, knocking out his two newly acquired front teeth. If Tom’s parents sue Mildred’s parents for damage to Tom’s teeth, the best defense would be: A. Tom was the initial aggressor. B. Mildred is too young to be responsible for her actions. C. A parent cannot be liable for damages due to the child’s conduct. D. They were unaware of any potentially violent behavior by Mildred.

As an expensive “D’ Alpini” designer scarf imported from Italy and which was stocked by the Ladies’ Boutique and by a few other retailers in the area. Bruno saw Rosalie put the scarf in her purse, and he discreetly kept an eye on her. Rosalie took the sweater to the cashier and paid for it. She then walked toward the exit door, only to find her way blocked by Bruno, who weighed at least twice as much as the petite Rosalie. Upon being asked by Bruno about the scarf, Rosalie pulled the scarf from her purse as well as a sales receipt showing that she had purchased the scarf two days before at the Ladies’ Boutique. Bruno said to her, “That’s fine, sorry to trouble you,” and Rosalie left the store. Can Rosalie successfully recover in a suit against the Ladies’ Boutique? A. Yes, because Bruno unlawfully detained Rosalie. B. Yes, if the detention caused Rosalie mental distress. C. No, because the detention was reasonably prompted and lasted no longer than necessary. D. No, because the detention was insufficient to constitute an imprisonment.

Mineralco owned a tract of land believed to be rich in deposits. It contracted with Digger for the removal of soil from the property and delivery of the soil to Mineralco’s laboratories. While one of Mineralco’s trucks was on the way to the laboratory, the rear gate broke loose, dumping three tons of soil onto the highway. Turner, who was driving a short but safe distance behind the truck, was unable to stop in time and collided with the soil, causing serious injury to Turner. The rear gate had been negligently secured by one of Digger’s employees. If Turner sues Mineralco for his injuries, will he prevail? A. No, because the rear gate was secured by Digger’s employee. B. No, if Digger had a license to transport soil on the highway. C. No, unless Mineralco was subject to a nondelegable duty in respect to the movement of its soil on the highway. D. No, if in the area where the accident occurred the transportation of soil on the highways was common practice.

Alice, Bob’s grandmother, calls Bob shortly before Bob’s twenty-first birthday. Alice tells Bob that she plans to send him $*,*.* as a birthday gift. Elated, Bob tells Alice he plans to use the money to pay for a trip to Europe. After ending the call, Bob immediately purchases a flight to Europe using his savings. Bob plans to offset the cost of the flight with the $*,*.* Alice promised him. Several days after Bob’s birthday, Bob calls Alice to inform her that he has yet to receive the $*,*.* she promised him. Alice tells Bob that she changed her mind and decided to give Bob nothing. Does Bob have an action in contract law? A. Yes, Bob has suffered damages. B. Yes, there is an enforceable contract. C. No, the promise fails for want of consideration. D. None of the above

Alice, Bob’s grandmother, calls Bob shortly before Bob’s twenty-first birthday. Alice tells Bob that she plans to send him $*,*.* as a birthday gift. Elated, Bob tells Alice he plans to use the money to pay for a trip to Europe. After ending the call, Bob immediately purchases a flight to Europe using his savings. Bob plans to offset the cost of the flight with the $*,*.* Alice promised him. Several days after Bob’s birthday, Bob calls Alice to inform her that he has yet to receive the $*,*.* she promised him. Alice tells Bob that she changed her mind and decided to give Bob nothing. Assuming Bob has no action in contract law, why would that be the case? A. There is a failure of mutual assent. B. There is a failure of consideration. C. The promise is one for a gift. D. B and C

Alice, Bob’s grandmother, calls Bob shortly before Bob’s twenty-first birthday. Alice tells Bob that she plans to send him $*,*.* as a birthday gift. Elated, Bob tells Alice he plans to use the money to pay for a trip to Europe. After ending the call, Bob immediately purchases a flight to Europe using his savings. Bob plans to offset the cost of the flight with the $*,*.* Alice promised him. Several days after Bob’s birthday, Bob calls Alice to inform her that he has yet to receive the $*,*.* she promised him. Alice tells Bob that she changed her mind and decided to give Bob nothing. Consideration may be considered as which of the following? A. A quid pro quo. B. A something for something. C. An exchange of benefits and deteriments on both sides of the promise. D. All of the above.

Alice, Bob’s grandmother, calls Bob shortly before Bob’s twenty-first birthday. Alice tells Bob that she plans to send him $*,*.* as a birthday gift. Elated, Bob tells Alice he plans to use the money to pay for a trip to Europe. After ending the call, Bob immediately purchases a flight to Europe using his savings. Bob plans to offset the cost of the flight with the $*,*.* Alice promised him. Several days after Bob’s birthday, Bob calls Alice to inform her that he has yet to receive the $*,*.* she promised him. Alice tells Bob that she changed her mind and decided to give Bob nothing. May Bob successfully sue his grandmother? A. No, not under a theory of contract law. B. No, not in equity. C. Yes, under a theory of contract law. D. Yes, in equity.

Alice, Bob’s grandmother, calls Bob shortly before Bob’s twenty-first birthday. Alice tells Bob that she plans to send him $*,*.* as a birthday gift. Elated, Bob tells Alice he plans to use the money to pay for a trip to Europe. After ending the call, Bob immediately purchases a flight to Europe using his savings. Bob plans to offset the cost of the flight with the $*,*.* Alice promised him. Several days after Bob’s birthday, Bob calls Alice to inform her that he has yet to receive the $*,*.* she promised him. Alice tells Bob that she changed her mind and decided to give Bob nothing. Assuming Bob reasonably relied upon the promise of his grandmother to his deteriment, what cause of action would be appropriate? A. A cause of action in contract law. B. A cause of action in equity C. A cause of action in tort. D. None of the above.