Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) Showing that the plaintiff assumed the risk of the actual harm suffered.
B) Showing that the defendant was aware that the plaintiff assumed the risk.
C) Showing that the plaintiff was aware of applicable law.
D) Showing that the plaintiff signed the contract assuming the risk without duress.
E) Showing a lack of contributory conduct on the part of other defendants.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Implied assumption of the risk.
B) Express assumption of the risk.
C) Express assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
D) Implied assumption of the last-clear-chance doctrine.
E) Assumption by incident.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Actual cause.
B) Cause in fact.
C) Legal cause.
D) Significant cause.
E) Factual Cause.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Negligence.
B) Assumption of the risk.
C) Strict liability.
D) Storekeeper liability.
E) Homeowner liability.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Last-clear-chance doctrine.
B) Assumption of the risk doctrine.
C) Contributory negligence doctrine.
D) Res ipsa loquitur.
E) Negligence per se.
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) South Africa's legal system is a combination of selected legal traditions involving Roman, Dutch, and French law, but not German law.
B) Under South African law, individuals can be found negligent in only one way, through failing to exercise reasonable care.
C) South African law models the law of the U.S. and is substantially the same.
D) South African law refuses to recognize sudden emergency as a standard for determining negligence in crisis situations.
E) South African law recognizes that one way to determine negligence is by determining whether the defendant could have prevented the consequent damages.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Good Samaritan statutes.
B) Aid to others statutes.
C) Rescue statutes.
D) Freedom statutes.
E) All clear statutes.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Reasonable person
B) Above-average person
C) Without error
D) Perfect accountability
E) Reasonable accountability
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) The court ruled that under pure contributive negligence principles, the plaintiff was entitled to recover.
B) The court ruled that under pure comparative negligence principles, the plaintiff was entitled to recover.
C) The court ruled that under modified comparative negligence principles, the plaintiff was entitled to recover.
D) The court dismissed the case on the basis of negligence per se.
E) The court dismissed the lawsuit on the basis that the plaintiff assumed the risk of harm.
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Assumption of the risk.
B) Last-clear-chance.
C) Modified comparative negligence.
D) Pure comparative negligence.
E) Both modified comparative negligence and last-clear-chance.
Correct Answer
verified
True/False
Correct Answer
verified
Essay
Correct Answer
verified
View Answer
Multiple Choice
A) Proximate cause
B) Legal cause
C) Cause in fact
D) Cause for certainty
E) Proximately related cause
Correct Answer
verified
Multiple Choice
A) Actual causation would exist because the bank would not have been burnt down if Holly had fulfilled her duty to drive properly.
B) Actual cause is present because as a matter of policy, it is believed that someone who rear-ends a vehicle should be responsible for damages.
C) Actual cause is present because Holly was the legal cause of the bank burning.
D) Actual cause is not present because Holly is not the legal cause of the bank burning.
E) Actual cause is not present because Holly is not the proximate cause of the bank burning.
Correct Answer
verified
Showing 21 - 40 of 71
Related Exams