Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

NY Bar 2014 > Negligence > Flashcards

Negligence Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards
1
Q

Elements of negligence claim

A

Duty of care? Breach of duty? Causation (factual/legal)? Damage?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Misdiagnosis of birth defect - damages?

A

Cost of care. Not emotional distress.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Failed sterilization leads to pregnancy - damages?

A

None.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Degree of care?

A

As exercised by reasonably prudent person in same circumstances. Objective test. No allowance for subjective ability.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Degree of care: Exceptions to reasonable person test

A

Superior skill / knowledge - reasonable person with that skill Physical characteristics - when relevant + expected to take reasonable precautions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Children’s liability

A

0-4: no negligence 5-18: care of reasonable child of similar age, experience and intelligence under circumstances. EXC: Child engaged in adult activity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Professional liability

A

Exercise skill and knowledge normally possessed by other members of profession in good standing in similar communities.(empirical, not subjective) Conform!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Premises liability: undiscovered trespasser

A

No duty (unforeseeable victim)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Premises liability: Discovered/anticipated

A

“Known man-made death traps” (1) Artificial condition (2) highly dangerous (3) concealed (4) known to D

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Premises liability: Licensees (no econ benefit to D)

A

“Known traps” (1) Concealed (2) known to D

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Premises liability: Invitee (econ benefit or open to public)

A

“Reasonably known traps” (1) Concealed (2) Known or should have known

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

NY Standard on premises liability

A

Reasonable prudence in the circumstances - depends on type of entrant.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Premises liability: Police and firefighters

A

No recovery when risk is inherent to job.NY No limitation, except against employer or colleague

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Child trespasser

A

Reasonable prudence re artificial conditions. Increases due to “attractive nuisance doctrine”.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Statutory standard of care

A

(Borrow criminal statute)Conditions: (1) P member of class that statute protects (2) Accident in class of risks that statute forbids NOT APPLICABLE: If compliance more dangerous than violationor impossible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Affirmative duty to act?

A

No. EXC:Pre-existing relationship D caused perilDuty: Reasonable, no heroics

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Gratuitous rescuer

A

Liable for negligent damage!

NY Good Samaritan law applies for simple negligence; protects business from resuscitation by employees

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Negligent infliction of emotional distress - 3 cases

A

(1) Near miss: D put P in danger zone + fear + physical manifestation of distress (2) Bystander to death or serious injury + close family member NY in zone of danger (3) Relationship - transactional (false positive HIV)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Breach - elements

A

(1) factual act/omission (ESSAY: “P will allege that breach was…”) (2) theory why below standard (“P will argue that act was unreasonable b/c…”)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Res ipsa - elements

A

(a) Accident of type normally associated with negligence (b) of person in D’s position [had control of process] (c) causation

21
Q

Multiple defendants, merged causes - causation test?

A

“Substantial factor” (rather than “but for”). Each could have caused harm independently (but in reality merged and caused damage together).

22
Q

Unascertainable cause (eg. two quail hunters) - liability?

A

Burden of proof on defendants to show which is liable. If unsuccessful - both are liable.

23
Q

Proximate cause in “direct cause case”

A

Foreseeability. Not freakish/bizarre results even when immediate.

24
Q

“Indirect cause cases” - 4 examples of liability

A
  1. Intervening: medical malpractice 2. Intervening: negligent rescue 3. Intervening: protection/reaction forces (eg. stampede)4. Subsequent disease/accidentLook for: connection btwn breach and damage.
25
Q

Eggshell skull principle vs foreseeability?

A

Initial injury must be foreseeable, then D liable for all damage even if unforeseeable.

26
Q

Insurance payments deducted from damages?

A

MBE: No. NY Yes!

27
Q

Equitable remedies (injunctions) - when granted?

A

No adequate “remedy at law”andProtectable rightand Enforceable (no complex supervision…)and BALANCE OF HARDSHIP in P’s favor

28
Q

Equitable remedies - 3 defenses

A
  1. P’s unclean hands 2. Laches (D relied on acquiescence) 3. 1st amendment (can’t stop free speech)
29
Q

Preliminary injunction - when?(freeze situation)

A
  1. Likelihood of success on meritsand2. Prevent irreparable harm.
30
Q

Affirmative defenses for negligence - two types

A
  1. “Classic contributory” - P making proximate contribution completely barred from recovery [ABOLISHED, RARELY USED] 2. “Comparative negligence” - damages deducted according to relative contribution.
31
Q

“Comparative negligence” - two types

A
  1. Pure: mathematical, doesn’t matter how high P’s portion is. (NY) [ASSUME ON MBE] 2. “Modified/partial” - if P’s contribution >50% no recovery [ONLY WHEN P GUILTY OF CRIME]
32
Q

Assumption of risk in sporting activities

A

NY Duty for recklessness, not reasonable care.

33
Q

Implied assumption of risk

A

Reduces recovery.Conditions: D knew of risk, voluntary consented by conduct to bear risk

34
Q

Strict liability - injury caused by animal?

A

Domesticated - no, unless known to be vicious Wild - always

35
Q

Strict liability - abnormally dangerous activity - conditions

A

Foreseeable risk of serious harm, even when care exercisedand Not in common usage in community

36
Q

Strict liability - product liability - conditions

A

D is merchant dealing in goods of same type (incl. manufacturer, wholesaler, lessor) and Defective product and Not altered by P and D making foreseeable use (even if unintended)

37
Q

Defective product - 3 types

A
  1. Manufacturing defect: differs from other products on assembly line. 2. Design defect: could be built (a) safer, (b) cost-effectively, and (c) practically. 3. Information defect: inadequate warning for inherent risk.
38
Q

Defective product - conformity to regs

A

Failure to conform - proves defective design. Conforms - non-conclusive evidence only

39
Q

Defense in strict liability claim

A

Assumption of risk Comparative fault (percentages…)

40
Q

Strict liability prima facie case

A
  1. D’s activity imposes absolute duty to make safe 2. Dangerous aspect is cause of injury 3. Damage
41
Q

Nuisance - element

A

Ability to use property disturbed to unreasonable degree.

42
Q

Car owner liability for user?

A

MBE: No, except if running errand for owner. NY Vicarious liability when driving with permission (and no-fault insurance applies)

43
Q

Parent liability for child’s actions?

A

MBE: No NY up to $2500

44
Q

Spouse claim for damages?

A

“Loss of consortium”: services, society, marital relations.

45
Q

Workers comp: Liability? Damages?

A

Employer strictly liable. No pain & sufferingEmployee cannot sue in court

46
Q

Workers comp: Secondary claims

A

Only employer can sue another on-site contractor or machine manufacturer.

47
Q

Workers comp: Independent contractor?

A

No, only employee.

48
Q

Workers comp: What is not covered?

A

Due to own intoxication;Self-inflicted;Voluntary off-duty athletic activity(Illegal acts on the job are covered!)

NY Bar 2014 (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions