Child Liability Defense

Full Conversation

Merchant contracted with Joe and Bill, professional painters who had their own partnership, to paint her furniture store. Midway through the job they ran out of paint, so Bill borrowed Joe's car to pick up more. On his way to pick up the paint, Bill decided to go to the library to pick up a book. After leaving the library, Bill, while looking at his phone to buy V Bucks, ran into Di's packed car, damging it extensively. In a negligence action against Merchant, Di will most likely: A. Recover under a theory of respondeat superior. B. Recover, because Bill was on a detour, not a frolic. C. Recover, because a principal is vicariously liable for the negligence of her agent. D. Not recover.
Di will most likely:
- A. Not recover under a theory of respondeat superior.
In Ohio, an employer (Merchant) is generally not responsible for the actions of an independent contractor (Joe and Bill). However, specific circumstances can alter this general rule.
Merchant contracted with Joe and Bill, professional painters who had their own partnership, to paint her furniture store. Midway through the job they ran out of paint, so Bill borrowed Joe's car to pick up more. On his way to pick up the paint, Bill decided to go to the library to pick up a book. After leaving the library, Bill, while looking at his phone to buy V Bucks, ran into Di's packed car, damging it extensively. If Di bring a negligence action against Joe, will she prevail? A. No, because lending the car to Bill was not negligent. B. No, because Bill was an independent contractor. C. No, because it involved the purchase of V Bucks. D. Yes, if Bill's stop at the liabrary wasn't a frolic.
If Di brings a negligence action against Joe, she will most likely:
- A. No, because lending the car to Bill was not negligent.
In Ohio, the owner of a vehicle is not typically liable for accidents caused by the person to whom they lent the vehicle, unless the driver was incompetent or unfit and the owner knew or should have known.
Matt looked out his front window one day and saw Rex standing on a narrow ledge on the second story of the house across the street. He also saw a ladder lying on the ground beneath where Rex was stranded. Matt turned away and pulled the drapes, saying to himself "I ain't seeing this." Later, Howard was walking down the street and saw Rex's situtation and determined to him a guy in need. Howard picke dup the ladder and placed it against the house. However, he set it up on a patch of ice. As Rex started down the ladder, a rotten rung broke and Rex fell to the ground and got all messed up. If Rex sues Matt for damages for his injuries will he recover? A. Yes, because Matt had a duty to aid Rex when he saw Rex in peril. B. Yes, because a reasonably prudent person would have done so under the circumstances. C. No, because Matt took no action to aid Rex. D. No, because Rex was just fine.
If Rex sues Matt for damages for his injuries, the most probable answer is:
- C. No, because Matt took no action to aid Rex.
In Ohio, there is generally no legal duty to aid or rescue someone unless a special relationship exists between the parties.
Matt looked out his front window one day and saw Rex standing on a narrow ledge on the second story of the house across the street. He also saw a ladder lying on the ground beneath where Rex was stranded. Matt turned away and pulled the drapes, saying to himself "I ain't seeing this." Later, Howard was walking down the street and saw Rex's situtation and determined to him a guy in need. Howard picke dup the ladder and placed it against the house. However, he set it up on a patch of ice. As Rex started down the ladder, a rotten rung broke and Rex fell to the ground and got all messed up. If Rex sues Howard, will he recover? A. Yes, because Howard's action caused the injury to Rex. B. Yes, because Howard assumed the duty of aiding Rex. C. Yes, because it was foreseeable that Rex would be injured as a result of Howard's negligent conduct so long as he was buying V Bucks. D. No, because Howard's negligence did not cause the injury to Rex.
If Rex sues Howard for his injuries, the most probable answer is:
- A. Yes, because Howard's action caused the injury to Rex.
In Ohio, if a person voluntarily assumes a duty of care and then acts negligently, they may be held liable.
Alice is a limited partner of ABC PC Partners, a business that manufactures, assembles, and sells RGB LED lighting for gaming computers. Bob and Carl are the general partners of ABC PC Partners. In *, upon being admitted to the partnership, Alice contributed $*,*.* in cash to the partnership. Since *, Alice has received a portion of the profits derived from the operation of ABC PC Partners. In *, a consumer group sued ABC PC Partnership, claiming that the business’s RGB LED lighting caused numerous fires in customers’ computers. Recently, the consumer group successfully obtained a judgment against ABC PC Partnership for $* million, an amount that will wipe out the entirety of ABC PC Partnership’s operating capital and assets. What is the scope of Alice's liability as a limited partner? A. $*,* B. Unlimited personal liability C. $*,* and all prospective liability D. $*,* and all previous and prospective liability.
The scope of Alice's liability as a limited partner is likely:
- A. $*,*
In Ohio, a limited partner's liability is typically limited to the amount of their investment in the partnership. However, this can vary depending on the specifics of the partnership agreement.
Alice is a limited partner of ABC PC Partners, a business that manufactures, assembles, and sells RGB LED lighting for gaming computers. Bob and Carl are the general partners of ABC PC Partners. In *, upon being admitted to the partnership, Alice contributed $*,*.* in cash to the partnership. Since *, Alice has received a portion of the profits derived from the operation of ABC PC Partners. In *, a consumer group sued ABC PC Partnership, claiming that the business’s RGB LED lighting caused numerous fires in customers’ computers. Recently, the consumer group successfully obtained a judgment against ABC PC Partnership for $* million, an amount that will wipe out the entirety of ABC PC Partnership’s operating capital and assets. What is the scope of the general partners liability? A. Unlimited B. $*,* C. $*,* and all prospective liability D. $*,* and all prospective and restroactiveliability
The scope of the general partners' liability is likely:
- A. Unlimited.
In Ohio, general partners can be held personally liable for all of the partnership's debts and obligations. This includes any judgments against the partnership.
Alice is a limited partner of ABC PC Partners, a business that manufactures, assembles, and sells RGB LED lighting for gaming computers. Bob and Carl are the general partners of ABC PC Partners. In *, upon being admitted to the partnership, Alice contributed $*,*.* in cash to the partnership. Since *, Alice has received a portion of the profits derived from the operation of ABC PC Partners. In *, a consumer group sued ABC PC Partnership, claiming that the business’s RGB LED lighting caused numerous fires in customers’ computers. Recently, the consumer group successfully obtained a judgment against ABC PC Partnership for $* million, an amount that will wipe out the entirety of ABC PC Partnership’s operating capital and assets. Assuming an amount of greater than *,* plaintiffs, what form will the action take? A. Tort B. Products liability C. Contract D. Products liability class action
The form the action will most likely take is:
- D. Products liability class action.
In Ohio, when a large number of plaintiffs have similar claims against a defendant, a class action lawsuit, particularly in products liability cases, can be formed.
Alice is a limited partner of ABC PC Partners, a business that manufactures, assembles, and sells RGB LED lighting for gaming computers. Bob and Carl are the general partners of ABC PC Partners. In *, upon being admitted to the partnership, Alice contributed $*,*.* in cash to the partnership. Since *, Alice has received a portion of the profits derived from the operation of ABC PC Partners. In *, a consumer group sued ABC PC Partnership, claiming that the business’s RGB LED lighting caused numerous fires in customers’ computers. Recently, the consumer group successfully obtained a judgment against ABC PC Partnership for $* million, an amount that will wipe out the entirety of ABC PC Partnership’s operating capital and assets. Alice is a _____. A. partner B. general partner C. shareholder D. limited partner
The answer is:
- D. Limited partner.
Based on the given information, Alice is a limited partner in the ABC PC Partners. As such, she is not personally liable for the debts and obligations of the partnership beyond her investment.
Alice is a limited partner of ABC PC Partners, a business that manufactures, assembles, and sells RGB LED lighting for gaming computers. Bob and Carl are the general partners of ABC PC Partners. In *, upon being admitted to the partnership, Alice contributed $*,*.* in cash to the partnership. Since *, Alice has received a portion of the profits derived from the operation of ABC PC Partners. In *, a consumer group sued ABC PC Partnership, claiming that the business’s RGB LED lighting caused numerous fires in customers’ computers. Recently, the consumer group successfully obtained a judgment against ABC PC Partnership for $* million, an amount that will wipe out the entirety of ABC PC Partnership’s operating capital and assets. If the partnership was a corporation, what claim would need to be filed to seek the personal liability of the persons involved? A. Tort B. Products liability C. Contract D. Piercing the Corporate veil
The answer is:
- D. Piercing the Corporate veil.
In Ohio, to hold individuals personally liable in a corporation, a claimant would typically need to "pierce the corporate veil," showing that the corporation was just a facade and should not provide protection to the individuals involved.