Chapter 9 Negligence and strict liability

Question 1

is behavior that creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others. In contrast to intentional torts, which result from a person’s willfully taking actions that are likely to cause injury, negligent torts involve the failure to exercise reasonable care to protect another’s person or property

Answer 1

negligence

Question 2

an incident that simply could not be avoided, even with reasonable care

Answer 2

unfortunate accident

Question 3

The standard of care a reasonable person owes another

Answer 3

duty

Question 4

Failure to live up to the standard of care.

Answer 4

breach of duty

Question 5

the determination that the plaintiff’s harm was a direct result of the defendant’s breach of duty

Answer 5

actual cause

Question 6

the extent to which, as a matter of policy, the defendant will be held liable for the consequences of his actions

Answer 6

proximate cause

Question 7

A compensable loss suffered by the plaintiff

Answer 7

damages

Question 8

a measurement of the way members of society expect an individual to act in a given situation

Answer 8

reasonable person standard

Question 9

an action committed with extreme reckless disregard for the property or life of another person

Answer 9

gross negligence

Question 10

(“the thing speaks for itself.” The plaintiff uses this doctrine to allow the judge or jury to infer that, more likely than not, the defendant’s negligence was the cause of the plaintiff’s harm even though there is no direct evidence of the defendant’s lack of due care.)

Answer 10

res ispa loquitur

Question 11

A doctrine that allows a judge or jury to infer duty and breach of duty from the fact that a defendant violated a statute that was designed to prevent the type of harm that the plaintiff incurred

Answer 11

negligence per se

Question 12

allow bartenders and bar owners to be held liable for injuries caused by individuals who become intoxicated at the bar.

Answer 12

dream shop acts

Question 13

A defense to negligence whereby the defendant can escape all liability by proving that the plaintiff failed to act in a way that would have protected him or her page_G-6from an unreasonable risk of harm and that the plaintiff’s negligent behavior contributed in some way to the plaintiff’s accident.

Answer 13

contributory negligence

Question 14

allows the plaintiff to recover damages despite proof of contributory negligence as long as the defendant had a final clear opportunity to avoid the action that injured the plaintiff

Answer 14

last clear chance doctrine

Question 15

A defense accepted in some states whereby the defendant is not liable for the percentage of harm that he or she can prove can be attributed to the plaintiff’s own negligence.

Answer 15

pure comparitive negligence

Question 16

In some states, a defense whereby the defendant is not liable for the percentage of harm that he or she proves can be attributed to the plaintiff’s own negligence if the plaintiff’s negligence is responsible for less than 50 percent of the harm. If the defendant establishes that the plaintiff’s negligence caused more than 50 percent of the harm, the defendant has no liability

Answer 16

modififed comparitive negligence

Question 17

occurs when the plaintiff expressly agrees (usually in a written contract) to assume the risk posed by the defendant’s behavior

Answer 17

express assumption of the risk

Question 18

means that the plaintiff implicitly assumed a known risk

Answer 18

implied assumption of the risk

Question 19

attempt to encourage selfless and courageous behavior by removing the threat of liability

Answer 19

good samaritan statutes

Question 20

n unforeseeable event that interrupts the causal chain between the defendant’s breach of duty and the damages the plaintiff suffered

Answer 20

superseding cause

Question 21

is liability without fault

Answer 21

strict liability