Miscellaneous Quiz / Sec 1A Torts Cases

Random Miscellaneous Quiz

Can you name the Case name?

Quiz not verified by Sporcle

Forced Order
Score 0/77 Timer 15:00
Dillon standard doesn't apply to mother + kidnapped baby in hospital
No liability when result would be crushing liability
res ipsa to smoke out which doc was negligent
Non-commercial social host has no duty towards 3rd parties injured by drunk minors
road surface, lack of signs: discretionary act -->liablity
causation: must show reasonable certainty for cause
financial harm: no knowledge of particular use, therefore no duty
duty to fetus which will result in a child
'shocks the conscious' --> overrule compensatory damages
Duty to protect patrons on commercial prop? Balancing test
defective design for autos: compare to other similar models
Standard of care: get out of car, look/listen for trains
Eggshell P rule
release form for ski resort unenforceable
Common carriers required to exercise reasonable care NOT extraordinary care
qualified immunity for govt
bible study group: licensee not invitee
knowingly encountering a risk created by D --> secondary assumption of risk
extreme event: only reasonable for damages that were foreseeable
danger is obvious and necessary--> assumption of risk
Adequate precautions against foreseeable risks = no liability
rape behind untrimmed hedges: not foreseeable
conscious disregard for others --> punitive damages
punitive: single-digit multiplier
Applies Birkner test for scope of employment --> vicarious liability
established: lawful act + ordinary care = no liability
Docs: no comparative negligence for Ps
cannot recover for loss of enjoyment of life w/o cog. awareness
no proof of elapsed time --> no constructive notice
Chem spill: use negligence, not SL
warnings: enough to say 'serious injury' don't need to be specific
Jury decides reasonable precautions for crossing train tracks
products: rejects privity; duty of care to end users
drinking buddies --> special relationship; start helping --> special relationship
negligent sterilization: limited-recovery rule; but if birth defects, special expenses
constructive notice of danger --> negligence
FDA requires waning--> exception to learned intermediary doctrine
mental distress: lack of physical manifestation OK; standard: ordinary sensitive person
foreseeability: probable consequences standard
Suing your parents is OK
motorcycle w/ no leg guards --> design defect
No lights on buggy: negligence per se
Jury should decide if airline is negligent for falling luggage
econ harm: surrounding businesses can't recover lost profits
Baller scientist gets disfigured: high non-pecuniary damages upheld
careless + some foreseeable harm = responsible for all resulting harm
B < PL
false information --> liable for resulting harm
no relationship if far away --> no duty
police: no duty re: specific threats
state of the art: ex ante approach
complex product: use risk/utility
Therapist has duty to protect threatened victim
GM design defect, but P was responsible too
legal, but inherently dangerous activity: liable
govt employee: ministerial/discretionary distinction
mental suffering: doesn't require physical impact, but does require physical manifestation
expert med testimony --> causation
shift burden for causation to Ds in special cases
bring something onto land -->mischief-->you're responsible
Falling barrel = res ipsa
Independent contractor: Apparent Auhority --> vicarious liability
no licensee/invitee distinction: both reasonable care
when statute: private action must be consistent w/ legislative scheme
safety statute = negligence per se; rule of the road doesn't
Med experts can testify --> educate jury about med mal res ipsa
firefighter rule doesn't apply beyond premises liability
econ harm: if foreseeable, can recover
No special relationship --> no aff duty
spare tire flew off truck = res ipsa
mental distress: dillon standard
Med Mal: national standard > similar localities test
fungible product: liability by market share
Negligent entrustment = not ok
SL for products
failure to follow industry standard doesn't establish negligence
Asbestos: physical contact =/= physical impact

You're not logged in!

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

You Might Also Like...

Show Comments


Top Quizzes Today

Score Distribution

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.