Torts STMU Law Fall 2021 Final

Joe was often bullied by his older brother, Tom. Joe knew that Tom and his friends would often climb up into their treehouse. One day, Joe decided to unscrew some of the screws on the ladder so that when Tom would climb up the ladder, it would break, causing Tom to fall. However, Tom's friend Bill climbed up the ladder and fell, causing him to suffer injuries. Is Joe liable for Bill's injuries?

Allen wanted to get back at his friend, Luke. Allen stood right behind Luke and pushed him down to the ground hard. Luke suffered leg pain because of his preexisting injuries and suffered a broken hand because of his fall. Is Allen liable for aggravation of both injuries?

Dave threatens to shoot Peter by pointing a gun at him. Peter later learns that the gun was not loaded. Dave is liable for assault

Dave kicked Pat's car and tried to get into it while shouting and swearing at her. Dave is not liable for assault

Ashley, a celebrity, was enrolled into a drug-rehabilitation course and she attended her first class. After the class, she left the building and was bombarded by paparazzi. One journalist wrote an article, simply stating that Ashley was seen at a rehab center. He did not slander her nor write anything bad about her. Ashley sues the journalist for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. Does she have grounds to sue?

Johnson wanted to purchase a used motor vehicle. The used car lot of Car Company, in a remote section away from town, was enclosed by a ten-foot chain link fence. While Johnson and Sales Representative, an employee of Car Company, were in the used car lot looking at cars, a security guard locked the gate at 1:30 p.m., because it was Saturday and the lot was supposed to be closed after 1:00 p.m. Saturday until Monday morning. At 1:45 p.m. Johnson and Sales Representative discovered they were locked in. There was no traffic in the vicinity and no way in which help could be summoned. After two hours, Johnson began to panic at the prospect of remaining undiscovered and without food or water until Monday morning. Sales Representative decided to wait in a car until help should come. Johnson tried to climb over the fence and, in doing so, fell and was injured. Johnson asserts a claim against Car Company for damages for his injuries. If Johnson’s claim is based on false imprisonment, will Johnson prevail?

Jill decided to play a prank on her brother, Jack. When Jack went into the closet to clean up a mess, Jill locked the door from the outside. Jack continued to clean for 20 more minutes until realizing that he was locked in. Jack was begging to get out as soon as he found out he was confined for 5 minutes. How long was Jack falsely imprisoned?

Dayton operates a collection agency. He was trying to collect a $400 bill for medical services rendered to Pratt by Doctor. Dayton went to Pratt’s house and when Martina, Pratt’s mother, answered the door, Dayton told Martina he was there to collect a bill owed by Pratt. Martina told Dayton that because of her illness, Pratt had been unemployed for six months, that she was still ill and unable to work, and that she would pay the bill as soon as she could. Dayton, in a loud voice, demanded to see Pratt and said that if he did not receive payment immediately, he would file a criminal complaint charging her with fraud. Pratt, hearing the conversation, came to the door. Dayton, in a loud voice, repeated his demand for immediate payment and his threat to use criminal process. If Pratt asserts a claim against Dayton, based on infliction of emotional distress, will Pratt prevail?

When Denton heard that his neighbor, Prout, intended to sell his home to a minority purchaser, Denton told Prout that Prout and his wife and children would meet with “accidents” if he did so. Prout then called the prospective purchaser and told him that he was taking the house off the market. If Prout asserts a claim against Denton for assault, Prout will:

If Prout asserts a claim against Denton for intentional infliction of emotional distress, Prout will:

Poe ordered some merchandise from Store. When the merchandise was delivered, Poe decided that it was not what he had ordered, and he returned it for credit. Store refused to credit Poe’s account, continued to bill him, and after 90 days, turned the account over to Kane, a bill collector, for collection. Kane called at Poe’s house at 7 p.m. On a summer evening while many of Poe’s neighbors were seated on their porches. When Poe opened the door, Kane, who was standing just outside the door, raised an electrically amplified bullhorn to his mouth. In a voice that could be heard a block away, Kane called Poe a “deadbeat” and asked him when he intended to pay his bill to store. Poe, greatly angered, slammed the door shut. The door struck the bullhorn and jammed it forcibly against Kane’s face. As a consequence, Kane lost some of his front teeth. If Poe asserts a claim based on intentional infliction of emotional distress against Kane, will Poe prevail?

Mistake is not a defense to trespass

A farmer leased a large country estate for a period of five years. One bright sunny day, a year after the farmer had moved onto the estate, the farmer's neighbor was flying a kite in the neighbor's backyard. The wind picked up and sent the neighbor's kite flying onto the farmer’s estate, where it became entangled in the limbs of one of the estate's large trees. The farmer discovered the kite and called the neighbor about retrieving his kite from her tree. However, unable to afford to pay someone to climb the immense tree to retrieve the kite, the neighbor decided to simply abandon the kite and refused to remove it. Will the farmer prevail in an action against the neighbor for trespass to land?

Peavey was walking peacefully along a public street when he encountered Dorwin, whom he had never seen before. Without provocation or warning, Dorwin picked up a rock and struck Peavey with it. It was later established that Dorwin was mentally ill and suffered recurrent hallucinations. If Peavey asserts a claim against Dorwin based on battery, which of the following, if supported by evidence, will be Dorwin’s best defense?

Which is not a requirement for battery under Restatement 29-13?

Lisa loaned money to Mary, to which Lisa told Mary to pay her back one week later. Mary failed to pay back Lisa within a week so Lisa confronted her. Lisa told Mary "You better be careful this week, I am going to make sure you pay" in a threatening voice. Can Mary have a claim for assault against Lisa?

David built his backyard a garage that encroached two feet across the property line onto property owned by his neighbor, Prudence. Thereafter, David sold his property to Drake. Prudence was unaware, prior to David’s sale to Drake, of the encroachment of the garage onto her property. When she thereafter learned of the encroachment, she sued David for damages for trespass.   Will she prevail?

In the absence of dispossession, proof of damage in the form of (There could be more than one answer):

Dower, an inexperienced driver, borrowed a car from Puder, a casual acquaintance, for the express purpose of driving it several blocks to the local drug store. Instead, Dower drove the car, which then was worth $12,000, 100 miles to Other City. While Dower was driving in Other City the next day, the car was hit by a negligently driven truck and sustained damage that will cost $3,000 to repair. If repaired, the car will be fully restored to its former condition. If Puder asserts a claim against Dower based on conversion, Puder should recover a judgment for:

Neighbor, who lived next door to Homeowner, went into Homeowner’s garage without permission and borrowed Homeowner’s chain saw. Neighbor used the saw to clear broken branches from the trees on Neighbor’s own property. After he had finished, Neighbor noticed several broken branches on Homeowner’s trees that were in danger of falling on Homeowner’s roof. While Neighbor was cutting Homeowner’s branches, the saw broke.   In a suit for conversion by Homeowner against Neighbor, will Homeowner recover?

To be effective, consent must be: (a) by one who has the capacity to consent; and (b) must be reasonable conduct

Al and Bill are identical twins. Al, angry at David, said, “You’d better stay out of my way. The next time I find you around here, I’ll beat you up.” Two days later, while in the neighborhood, David saw Bill coming toward him. As Bill came up to David, Bill raised his hand. Thinking Bill was Al and fearing bodily harm, David struck Bill.   If Bill asserts a claim against David and David relies on the privilege of self-defense, David will

Replevin allows the plaintiff to recover possession of the chattel in specie, and recoup any type of damages

Can a possessor of a chattel, if wrongfully dispossessed by fraud or force and prompt discovery, recover using reasonable non-deadly force?

Hank is a big security guard whose job is to prevent shoplifters from fleeing the store. Hank sees Cindy wearing a scarf with the tag still on it. Cindy often forgets to remove the tags on articles of clothing that she purchases (Cindy indeed purchased the scarf). Cindy, having find nothing to buy, tries to leave the store but is stopped by Hank. Cindy is detained for 10 minutes and then finally let go. Can Cindy sue for false imprisonment?

Husband and Wife, walking on a country road, were frightened by a bull running loose on the road. They climbed over a fence to get onto the adjacent property, owned by Grower. After climbing over the fence, Husband and Wife damaged some of Grower’s plants which were near the fence. The fence was posted with a large sign, “No Trespassing.” Grower saw Husband and Wife and came toward them with his large watchdog on a long leash. The dog rushed at Wife. Grower had intended only to frighten Husband and Wife, but the leash broke, and before Grower could restrain the dog, the dog bit Wife.   4. If Husband asserts a claim based on assault against Grower, will Husband prevail?

Husband and Wife, walking on a country road, were frightened by a bull running loose on the road. They climbed over a fence to get onto the adjacent property, owned by Grower. After climbing over the fence, Husband and Wife damaged some of Grower’s plants which were near the fence. The fence was posted with a large sign, “No Trespassing.” Grower saw Husband and Wife and came toward them with his large watchdog on a long leash. The dog rushed at Wife. Grower had intended only to frighten Husband and Wife, but the leash broke, and before Grower could restrain the dog, the dog bit Wife.  If Grower asserts a claim against Wife and Husband for damage to his plants, will Grower prevail?

Homeowner hired Arsonist to set fire to Homeowner’s house so that Homeowner could collect the insurance proceeds from the fire. After pouring gasoline around the house, Arsonist lit the fire with his cigarette lighter and then put the lighter back in his pocket. As Arsonist was standing back admiring his work, the lighter exploded in his pocket. Arsonist suffered severe burns to his leg. Arsonist brought an action against the manufacturer of the lighter based on strict product liability. Under applicable law, the rules of pure comparative fault apply in such actions.  Will Arsonist prevail?

What are the Four elements of Negligence?

When Mary Weld visited Dugan’s Alleys to participate in the weekly bowling league competition held there, she brought her 2-year-old son, Bobby, along and left him in a nursery provided by Dugan for the convenience of his customers. The children in the nursery were normally supervised by three attendants, but at this particular time, as Mary Weld knew, there was only one attendant present to care for about twenty children of assorted ages. About thirty minutes later, while the attendant was looking the other way, Bobby suddenly started to cry. The attendant found him lying on his back, picked him up, and called his mother. It was later discovered that Bobby had suffered a skull fracture.  If a claim is asserted against Dugan on Bobby’s behalf, will Bobby prevail?

Children must normally exercise the degree of care that would be observed by children of similar “age, intelligence, and experience" even if they participate in a dangerous adult activity

Dora, who was eight years old, went to the grocery store with her mother. Dora pushed the grocery cart while her mother put items into it. Dora’s mother remained near Dora at all times. Peterson, another customer in the store, noticed Dora pushing the cart in a manner that caused Peterson no concern. A short time later, the cart Dora was pushing struck Peterson in the knee, inflicting serious injury.   If Peterson brings an action, based on negligence, against Dora, Dora’s best argument in defense would be that

Suzie (age 16) has just gotten her automobile driver’s license. She went to pick up her friend Billy (age 15) to go for a ride. While Suzie was driving around, they had an accident. Billy would like to sue Suzie for the personal injuries that he suffered. What standard of care will apply to Suzie?

At the trial of an action against Grandmother on behalf of Patrick, the following evidence has been introduced. Grandson and his friend, Patrick, both aged eight, were visiting at Grandmother’s house when, while exploring the premises, they discovered a hunting rifle in an unlocked gun cabinet. They removed it from the cabinet and were examining it when the rifle, while in Grandson’s hands, somehow discharged. The bullet struck and injured Patrick. The gun cabinet was normally locked. Grandmother had opened it for dusting several days before the boys’ visit, and had then forgotten to relock it. She was not aware that it was unlocked when the boys arrived. If the defendant moves for a directed verdict in her favor at the end of the plaintiff’s case, that motion should be

Which of the following is NOT a statute allowing no excuses or defenses?

Dieter parked her car in violation of a city ordinance that prohibits parking within ten feet of a fire hydrant. Because Grove was driving negligently, his car sideswiped Dieter’s parked car. Plaintiff, a passenger in Grove’s car, was injured in the collision. If Plaintiff asserts a claim against Dieter to recover damages for his injuries, basing his claim on Dieter’s violation of the parking ordinance, will Plaintiff prevail?

Section 1 of the Vehicle Code of State makes it illegal to cross a street in a central business district other than that at a designated crosswalk. Section 2 of the Code prohibits parking any motor vehicle so that it blocks any part of a designated crosswalk. Ped wanted to cross Main Street in the central business district of City, located in State, but a truck parked by Trucker was blocking the designated crosswalk. Ped stepped out into Main Street and very carefully walked around the back of the truck. Ped was struck by a motor vehicle negligently operated by Driver. If Ped asserts a claim against Trucker, the most likely result is that Ped will

A woman was a star player for the local women's basketball team which played their home games at the city arena. After one game as the woman was leaving the court she slipped on a banana peel which had been thrown onto the court by a fan toward the end of the game. If the woman brings an action against the city arena, will she prevail?

Under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, the type of injury that occurs must not be one of common occurrence in the absence of negligence

Traveler was a passenger on a commercial aircraft owned and operated by Airline. The aircraft crashed into a mountain, killing everyone on board. The flying weather was good. Traveler’s legal representative brought a wrongful death action against Airline. At trial, the legal representative offered no expert to other testimony as the cause of the crash.   On Airline’s motion to dismiss at the conclusion of the legal representative’s case, the court should

Can the doctrine of res ipsa be applied to multiple defendants?

As Paul, a bartender, was removing the restraining wire from a bottle of champagne produced and bottled by Winery, Inc., the plastic stopper suddenly shot out of the bottle. The stopper struck and injured Paul’s eye. Paul had opened other bottles of champagne, and occasionally the stoppers had shot out with great force, but Paul had not been injured. Paul has brought an action against Winery, Inc., alleging that the bottle that caused his injury was defective and unreasonably dangerous because its label did not warn that the stopper might suddenly shoot out during opening. The state has merged contributory negligence and unreasonable assumption of risk into a pure comparative fault system that is applied in strict liability actions.   If the jury finds that the bottle was defective and unreasonably dangerous because it lacked a warning, will Paul recover a judgment in his favor?

Under the Substantial Factor test, conduct is a substantial factor if it was: (1) "but-for" or (2) independently sufficient

John was about to have surgery on his leg. It wasn't significantly life threatening. He had a 75% chance of survival before the surgery. The surgery, however, went awry. John survived the surgery but suffered a bad infection in his leg. His chance of survival after the surgery was now 25%. If the amount in damages was $500,000, how much would he recover under the loss of a chance doctrine?

Under multiple fault, the alternative liability rationale is applicable ONLY when at least one of the defendants are shown to have acted tortuously

Under joint and several liability, can the plaintiff recover more than one full compensation?

Pat had been under the care of a cardiologist for three years prior to submitting to an elective operation that was performed by Surgeon. Two days thereafter, Pat suffered a stroke, resulting in a coma, caused by a blood clot that lodged in her brain. When it appeared that she had entered a permanent vegetative state, with no hope of recovery, the artificial life support system that had been provided was withdrawn, and she died a few hours later. The withdrawal of artificial life support had been requested by her family, and duly approved by a court. Surgeon was not involved in that decision, or in its execution. The administrator of Pat’s estate thereafter filed a wrongful death action against Surgeon, claiming that Surgeon was negligent in having failed to consult a cardiologist prior to the operation. At the trial the plaintiff offered evidence that accepted medical practice would require examination of the patient by a cardiologist prior to the type of operation that Surgeon performed. In this action, the plaintiff should

Peter and Donald were in the habit of playing practical jokes on each other on their respective birthdays. On Peter’s birthday, Donald sent Peter a cake containing an ingredient that he knew had, in the past, made Peter very ill. After Peter had eaten a piece of the cake, he suffered severe stomach pains and had to be taken to the hospital by ambulance. On the way to the hospital, the ambulance driver suffered a heart attack, which caused the ambulance to swerve from the road and hit a tree. As a result of the collision, Peter suffered a broken leg.   In a suit by Peter against Donald to recover damages for Peter’s broken leg, Peter will

What did the trial judge rule in Wagon Mound I?

Desmond fell while attempting to climb a mountain, and lay unconscious and critically injured on a ledge that was difficult to reach. Pearson, an experienced mountain climber, was himself seriously injured while trying to rescue Desmond. Pearson’s rescue attempt failed, and Desmond died of his injuries before he could be reached.   Pearson brought an action against Desmond’s estate for compensation for his injuries. In this jurisdiction, the traditional common-law rules relating to contributory negligence and assumption of risk remain in effect. Will Pearson prevail in his action against Desmond’s estate?

The day after Seller completed the sale of his house and moved out, one of the slates flew off the roof during a windstorm. The slate struck Pedestrian, who was on the public sidewalk. Pedestrian was seriously injured. The roof is old and has lost several slates in ordinary windstorms and other occasions.  If Pedestrian sues Seller to recover damages for his injuries, will Pedestrian prevail?

Passer was driving his pickup truck along a lonely road on a very cold night. Passer saw Tom, who was a stranger, lying in a field by the side of the road and apparently injured. Passer stopped his truck, alighted, and, upon examining Tom, discovered that Tom was intoxicated and in danger of suffering from exposure to the cold. However, Passer returned to his truck and drove away without making any effort to help Tom. Tom remained lying at the same place and was later injured when struck by a car driven by Traveler, who was drowsy and inattentive, had veered off the road into the field and hit Tom. Traveler did not see Tom prior to hitting him. If Tom asserts a claim against Traveler, will Tom prevail?

Passer was driving his pickup truck along a lonely road on a very cold night. Passer saw Tom, who was a stranger, lying in a field by the side of the road and apparently injured. Passer stopped his truck, alighted, and, upon examining Tom, discovered that Tom was intoxicated and in danger of suffering from exposure to the cold. However, Passer returned to his truck and drove away without making any effort to help Tom. Tom remained lying at the same place and was later injured when struck by a car driven by Traveler, who was drowsy and inattentive, had veered off the road into the field and hit Tom. Traveler did not see Tom prior to hitting him.   If Tom asserts a claim against Passer for damages for his injuries, will Tom prevail?

Dave is a six-year-old boy who has a well deserved reputation for bullying younger and smaller children. His parents have encouraged him to be aggressive and tough. Dave, for no reason, knocked down, kicked and severely injured Pete, a four-year-old. A claim for relief has been asserted by Pete’s parents for their medical and hospital costs and for Pete’s injuries.   If the claim is asserted against Dave’s parents, the most likely result is that they will be

Which of the following is not an exception for land owners having a duty of care to trespassers?

Prad entered Drug Store to make some purchases. As he was searching the aisles for various items, he noticed a display card containing automatic pencils. They display card was on a high shelf behind a cashier’s counter. Prad saw a sign on the counter that read, “No Admittance, Employees Only.” Seeing no clerks in the vicinity to help him, Prad went behind the counter to get a pencil. A clerk then appeared behind the counter and asked whether she could help him. He said he wanted a pencil and that he could reach the display card himself. That clerk said nothing further. While reaching for the display card, Prad stepped sideways into an open shaft and fell to the basement, ten feet below. The clerk knew of the presence of the open shaft, but assumed incorrectly that Prad had noticed it. Prad sued Drug Store to recover damages for the injuries he sustained in the fall. The jurisdiction has adopted a new rule of pure comparative negligence, and it follows traditional common-law rules governing the duties of a land possessor. Will Prad recover a judgment against Drug Store?

Ann’s three-year-old daughter, Janet, was killed in an automobile accident. At Ann’s direction, Janet’s body was taken to a mausoleum for interment. Normally, the mausoleum’s vaults are permanently sealed with marble plates secured by “tamper-proof” screws. After Janet’s body was placed in the mausoleum, however, only a fiberglass panel secured by caulking compound covered her vault. About a month later, Janet’s body was discovered in a cemetery located near the mausoleum. It had apparently been left there by vandals who had taken it from the mausoleum. As a result of this experience, Ann suffered great emotional distress. If Ann sues the mausoleum for the damages arising from her emotional distress, will she prevail?  

In a trial to a jury, Owner proved that Power Company’s negligent maintenance of a transformer caused a fire that destroyed his restaurant. The jury returned a verdict for Owner in the amount of $450,000 for property loss and $500,000 for emotional distress. The trial judge entered judgment in those amounts. Power Company appealed that part of the judgment awarding $500,000 for emotional distress. On appeal, the judgment should be

Under pure comparative negligence, if the plaintiff is at 51% fault, then he can recover

Under modified comparative negligence, if the plaintiff is at 51% fault, he can recover

Perkins and Morton were passengers sitting in adjoining seats on a flight on Delval Airline. There were many empty seats on the aircraft. During the flight, a flight attendant served Morton nine drinks. As Morton became more and more obviously intoxicated and attempted to engage Perkins in a conversation, Perkins chose to ignore Morton. This angered Morton, who suddenly struck Perkins in the face, giving her a black eye.  If Perkins asserts a claim for damages against Delval Airline based on negligence, Perkins will

What element of deceit is missing? Material misrepresentation of fact, __________, justifiable reliance, damages, intent to induce reliance

Which of these is NOT a non-delegable duty?

Dorfman’s dog ran into the street in front of Dorfman’s home and began chasing cars. Peterson, who was driving a car on the street, swerved to avoid hitting the dog, struck a telephone pole, and was injured. If Peterson asserts a claim against Dorfman, will Peterson prevail?

While walking on a public sidewalk, Anson was struck by a piece of lumber that fell from the roof of Bruce’s house. Bruce had hired Chase to make repairs to his roof, and the lumber fell through negligence on Chase’s part. If Anson brings an action against Bruce to recover damages for the injury caused to him by Chase’s negligence, will Anson prevail?

One who sells any product in a _________________________________ to the user or consumer or to his property is subject to liability for physical harm thereby caused to the ultimate user or consumer, or to his property. What should be on the blank?

Which of these is NOT a category of a product defect?

Cycle Company manufactured a bicycle that it sold to Bike Shop, a retail bicycle dealer, which in turn sold it to Roth. Shortly thereafter, while Roth was riding the bicycle along a city street, he was a traffic light facing him turn from green to amber. He sped up, hoping to cross the intersection before the light turned red. However, Roth quickly realized that he could not do so and applied the brake, which failed. To avoid the traffic that was then crossing in front of him, Roth turned sharply to his right and onto the sidewalk, where he struck Perez, a pedestrian. Both Perez and Roth sustained injuries. If Roth asserts a claim against Bike Shop based on strict liability in tort, will Roth prevail?

Cycle Company manufactured a bicycle that it sold to Bike Shop, a retail bicycle dealer, which in turn sold it to Roth. Shortly thereafter, while Roth was riding the bicycle along a city street, he was a traffic light facing him turn from green to amber. He sped up, hoping to cross the intersection before the light turned red. However, Roth quickly realized that he could not do so and applied the brake, which failed. To avoid the traffic that was then crossing in front of him, Roth turned sharply to his right and onto the sidewalk, where he struck Perez, a pedestrian. Both Perez and Roth sustained injuries. If Perez asserts a claim based on negligence against Cycle company and it is found that the brake failure resulted from a manufacturing defect in the bicycle, will Perez prevail?

Plaintiff assumes risks inherent in the nature of the activity, such as sports. This is known as secondary implied risk

Diggers Construction Company was engaged in blasting operations to clear the way for a new road. Diggers had erected adequate barriers and posted adequate warning signs in the vicinity of the blasting. Although Paul read and understood the signs, he entered the area to walk his dog. As a result of the blasting, Paul was hit by a piece of rock and sustained head injuries. The jurisdiction follows the traditional common law rules governing the defenses of contributory negligence, assumption of risk, and last clear chance.  In an action by Paul against Diggers to recover damages for his injuries, Paul will

At a jury trial, P was awarded $15 million in damages, for which D1 was 10% liable; D2, 20%; D3, 30%; D4, 40%. Thereafter, D4 became judgement-proof (insolvent). If the court requires D1, D2 and D3 to reallocate their shares proportionally, then how much does D2 owe?