Exam (elaborations)
LEB 320F UT Final Exam Questions and Answers 2024
- Course
- Institution
LEB 320F UT Final Exam Questions and Answers
[Show more]
Content preview
LEB 320F UT Final Exam Questions and Answerssummary judgment - Answer -A Judge can grant _____ terminating a case before it ever goes to trial
Granted if evidence clearly shows one side will win so a trial would be a waste of time.
PODIAS V. MAIRS - Answer -Lower court granted summary judgement & dismissed plantiffs case, Appeleate court dissaregreed and said Defendants were liable so case was remanded & sent back to lower court.
THE CASE
Mairs w/ 2 friends in the car, drunk driving hits podias, all leave scene, no one calls 911
Sueing friends
Result: jury finds defendants liable for negligence bc aided & abetted Mairs (let him drunk drive), and wrongful post-accident conduct (left him in the middle of the road/ didn't call 911)
Order of what happens before a trail - Answer -1. Plantiff complaint -summons to defendant
2. Motion to dismiss 3. Answer
4.Default judgement 5. Discovery stage -depostition, interrogatories, request for production of documents
6. Summary judgement
Bill says, "I hate Steve!" Steve's boss hears the exclamation, and later fires Steve because he no longer trusts him. Steve has to go into business for himself.
Tom says, "Steve stole $1000 from me when I hired him to do my taxes!" This is not true. Steve's largest client fires him.
Bill has committed __________________, and Tom has committed _______________.
A. no type of defamation; slander per se B. no type of defamation; libel
C. slander; slander per se
D. slander; libe - Answer -ANSWER: A. Bill has given his opinion, and has not stated something that is verifiably false, so there is no defamation even though Steve has suffered a negative consequence. Tom has lied to another person about Steve, and because it involves Steve's professional reputation, it amounts to slander per se and not
just ordinary slander. Sue rents a Segway scooter. While riding around downtown, she spots her arch enemy Archie, who is standing on a sidewalk facing away from her and looking at his phone. Sue grimaces, sets her shoulders, and accelerates to the Segway's top speed of 5 miles
per hour. With a look of pure rage, she zeroes in on Archie, who is still looking at his phone and scrolling through an endless stream of nothing in particular.
Eventually, Sue reaches Archie and runs into him from behind, knocking him down to the sidewalk. Archie never saw it coming. In the fall, he breaks his wrist.
What torts has Sue committed?
A. Assault
B. Battery
C. BothAandB
D. None of the above - Answer -ANSWER: B. Since Archie was never afraid, Sue has not committed assault. But, since she deliberately acted and caused a harmful bodily contact, she has committed battery.
Ann lives in a state that has a 2-year statute of limitations and a 10-year statute of repose on negligence cases. Two bad things happen to her in 2018. First, she is involved in a car accident that is entirely the fault of Donny Driver. Immediately after the wreck, she is operated on by Sally Surgeon. Sally does a careless job of reconstructing Ann's elbow, but it is done in a way that causes no initial pain and that Ann does not even notice until 2020.
Now it is 2021. Ann is frustrated by her elbow pain, and decides that she wants to sue both Donny and Sally. Can her lawsuit proceed if the defendants raise the defenses described in this section?
A. Yes, against Donny and Sally. B. Yes, against Donny only.
C. Yes, against Sally only,
D. No. - Answer -ANSWER: C. Because she was not able to detect the botched surgery
until 2020, the 2-year statute of limitations was tolled and did not begin to run until 2020,
so the lawsuit against Sally can proceed. It is too late to sue Donny in 2021, because it has been more than 2 years since the accident.
After a long day of creating online course materials, Prentice and Bredeson have a fender- bender in the faculty parking lot. They briefly consider fighting, but they soon realize that neither is particularly good at fighting, so they decide to sue each other instead.
At trial, the evidence shows that at the time of the accident, Prentice was behind the wheel eating a cheeseburger and fiddling with his radio, and that Bredeson was talking on two cell phones. The jury concludes that the wreck was 60% Bredeson's fault and 40% Prentice's fault.
Bredeson will recover 40% of his losses in which type of system?
A. pure comparative negligence
B. modified comparative negligence C. bothAandB
D. none of the above - Answer -ANSWER: A. Bredeson gets nothing in a either type of modified system, because he is over half at fault. Bredeson can recover 40% of his losses in a pure comparative system. He end up with that amount because his award will be reduced by the 60% of the blame that falls on him. Imagine that Peter, who works for Pepsi, puts 200 cans of Pepsi into an empty vending machineonMondaymorning. Laterthatday,KarlKlutzbuysaPepsifromthesamemachineand
takes it out onto a second floor balcony. Karl sees Vince Victim down below, waves to him, and fumbles the Pepsi. The can describes a perfect arc and conks Vince on the head, knocking him unconscious. When he comes to, Vince feels like filing a lawsuit.
Whose actions are a proximate cause of this injury?
A. Peter
B. Karl
C. BothAandB
D. None of the above - Answer -Answer: B. Only Karl's action is a proximate cause. Peter is sort of involved in all of this, in the sensethat,ifhehadnotrestockedtheemptymachine,thisaccidentmightnothavehappened. But he would not be considered a proximate cause, because a jury would not say, "Ah, you should have known better - you should have foreseen that this kind of thing would happen if you did your job and put cans in the machine." Karl's actions would be a proximate cause, because a jury would say that he should have foreseen that if he dropped the can from a high place he might injure someone, and that he should have been more careful to hold onto it.
Imagine that Peter, who works for Pepsi, puts 200 cans of Pepsi into an empty vending machineonMondaymorning. Laterthatday,KarlKlutzbuysaPepsifromthesamemachineand
takes it out onto a second floor balcony. Karl sees Vince Victim down below, waves to him, and fumbles the Pepsi. The can describes a perfect arc and conks Vince on the head, knocking him unconscious. When he comes to, Vince feels like filing a lawsuit.
Whose actions are causes in fact of this injury?
A. Peter
B. Karl
C. BothAandB
D. None of the above - Answer -Answer: B. Both Peter's and Karl's actions are causes in fact. If you eliminate either's actions, the accident doesn't happen. But as we will see shortly, it is very unlikely that Peter will be held responsible for Vince's injuries.
False Imprisonment (Intentional Tort) - Answer -right to sue for the tort of false imprisonment when persons are unlawfully confined or restrained without their consent.
Key Elements of False Imprisonment - Answer -1. Intentional confinement (can't be by accident, that would be negligence not false imprisonment)
2. without consent
3. without lawful authority: Police has probable cause for detainment (But method, means, and duration must be reasonable)
4. Injury
*To win any type of civil lawsuit, you must prove _______. - Answer -Injury
Intentional Infliction of Mental Distress
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller millyphilip. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $12.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
73091 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now