Sec 1A Torts Cases

Random Miscellaneous Quiz

Can you name the Case name?

Quiz not verified by Sporcle

How to Play
Challenge
Share
Tweet
Embed
HoldingCase
complex product: use risk/utility
Baller scientist gets disfigured: high non-pecuniary damages upheld
govt employee: ministerial/discretionary distinction
Negligent entrustment = not ok
B < PL
shift burden for causation to Ds in special cases
no relationship if far away --> no duty
No special relationship --> no aff duty
firefighter rule doesn't apply beyond premises liability
spare tire flew off truck = res ipsa
Docs: no comparative negligence for Ps
Falling barrel = res ipsa
products: rejects privity; duty of care to end users
financial harm: no knowledge of particular use, therefore no duty
punitive: single-digit multiplier
danger is obvious and necessary--> assumption of risk
Eggshell P rule
mental distress: dillon standard
Jury should decide if airline is negligent for falling luggage
econ harm: surrounding businesses can't recover lost profits
res ipsa to smoke out which doc was negligent
conscious disregard for others --> punitive damages
'shocks the conscious' --> overrule compensatory damages
Asbestos: physical contact =/= physical impact
Suing your parents is OK
Chem spill: use negligence, not SL
HoldingCase
qualified immunity for govt
warnings: enough to say 'serious injury' don't need to be specific
road surface, lack of signs: discretionary act -->liablity
econ harm: if foreseeable, can recover
mental distress: lack of physical manifestation OK; standard: ordinary sensitive person
causation: must show reasonable certainty for cause
drinking buddies --> special relationship; start helping --> special relationship
duty to fetus which will result in a child
GM design defect, but P was responsible too
Med experts can testify --> educate jury about med mal res ipsa
Common carriers required to exercise reasonable care NOT extraordinary care
bible study group: licensee not invitee
defective design for autos: compare to other similar models
failure to follow industry standard doesn't establish negligence
constructive notice of danger --> negligence
Dillon standard doesn't apply to mother + kidnapped baby in hospital
Adequate precautions against foreseeable risks = no liability
foreseeability: probable consequences standard
Jury decides reasonable precautions for crossing train tracks
established: lawful act + ordinary care = no liability
FDA requires waning--> exception to learned intermediary doctrine
Non-commercial social host has no duty towards 3rd parties injured by drunk minors
mental suffering: doesn't require physical impact, but does require physical manifestation
safety statute = negligence per se; rule of the road doesn't
state of the art: ex ante approach
Applies Birkner test for scope of employment --> vicarious liability
HoldingCase
no proof of elapsed time --> no constructive notice
careless + some foreseeable harm = responsible for all resulting harm
extreme event: only reasonable for damages that were foreseeable
Med Mal: national standard > similar localities test
Therapist has duty to protect threatened victim
negligent sterilization: limited-recovery rule; but if birth defects, special expenses
motorcycle w/ no leg guards --> design defect
police: no duty re: specific threats
No liability when result would be crushing liability
SL for products
Duty to protect patrons on commercial prop? Balancing test
Standard of care: get out of car, look/listen for trains
rape behind untrimmed hedges: not foreseeable
knowingly encountering a risk created by D --> secondary assumption of risk
bring something onto land -->mischief-->you're responsible
legal, but inherently dangerous activity: liable
no licensee/invitee distinction: both reasonable care
expert med testimony --> causation
No lights on buggy: negligence per se
false information --> liable for resulting harm
release form for ski resort unenforceable
cannot recover for loss of enjoyment of life w/o cog. awareness
Independent contractor: Apparent Auhority --> vicarious liability
fungible product: liability by market share
when statute: private action must be consistent w/ legislative scheme

You're not logged in!

Compare scores with friends on all Sporcle quizzes.
Sign Up with Email
OR
Log In

You Might Also Like...

Show Comments

Extras


Your Account Isn't Verified!

In order to create a playlist on Sporcle, you need to verify the email address you used during registration. Go to your Sporcle Settings to finish the process.