Purchase a course multi-pack for yourself or a friend and save up to 50%!
5-COURSE MULTI-PACK $180
10-COURSE MULTI-PACK $300
Accelerated 1-year bachelor's program
Question 1
Fred is supposed to transport two hundred gallons of propane gas to his friend Barney's house for a barbeque party that Barney is hosting. Fred rents a four-by-four pick-up truck and goes to the propane filling station with two hundred one-gallon plastic milk cartons. Fred fills up the milk cartons, loads them onto the truck and begins his trip to Barney's house. Normally, special reinforced plastic containers are used to transport propane, but Fred uses the milk cartons because, even though they are not as safe, they are cheaper than the reinforced plastic containers. On the way to Barney's house, Fred loses control of the truck and crashes into a guard-rail in the middle of the road. The propane in the back of the truck spills out onto the street and ignites, causing a large explosion. Wilma, who was in the car behind Fred, is seriously injured. In a suit against Fred, Wilma will most likely:
Correct There are two steps in determining breach of duty. The first is determining what happened. The second is determining whether the defendant's conduct was reasonable or unreasonable under the circumstances. This requires a jury to balance the risks and the benefits of the defendant's actions. The risk of the defendant's actions is a combination of both the damage that might occur and the probability that damage will occur. This magnitude of risk must be weighed against the benefit of the actions that defendant took. Defendant's actions will be considered unreasonable, and therefore negligent, if the foreseeable risk outweighs the benefit of the defendant's actions. The general rule is that where the risk of injury is low, but the benefit is high, the defendant's conduct is more likely to be considered reasonable. However, where the benefit of the conduct is not so high and less dangerous alternatives are available at little cost or effort, it is more likely that negligence will be found, especially if the risk of injury is higher. It is clear that the risks of harm (a gas spill and a possible explosion) in this case outweighed the benefit of Fred's actions (saving money on cheaper containers). This means that Fred's actions were unreasonable and therefore negligent. Thus, Wilma will likely win her suit and A is the correct answer.
Incorrect! There are two steps in determining breach of duty. The first is determining what happened. The second is determining whether the defendant's conduct was reasonable or unreasonable under the circumstances. This requires a jury to balance the risks and the benefits of the defendant's actions. The risk of the defendant's actions is a combination of both the damage that might occur and the probability that damage will occur. This magnitude of risk must be weighed against the benefit of the actions that defendant took. Defendant's actions will be considered unreasonable, and therefore negligent, if the foreseeable risk outweighs the benefit of the defendant's actions. The general rule is that where the risk of injury is low, but the benefit is high, the defendant's conduct is more likely to be considered reasonable. However, where the benefit of the conduct is not so high and less dangerous alternatives are available at little cost or effort, it is more likely that negligence will be found, especially if the risk of injury is higher. It is clear that the risks of harm (a gas spill and a possible explosion) in this case outweighed the benefit of Fred's actions (saving money on cheaper containers). This means that Fred's actions were unreasonable and therefore negligent. Thus, Wilma will likely win her suit and A is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 2
Fred is supposed to bring two hundred gallons of water to his friend Barney's house for a barbeque party that Barney is hosting. Fred rents a four-by-four pick-up truck and goes to the garden hose in his backyard with two hundred one-gallon plastic milk cartons. Fred fills up the milk cartons, loads them onto the truck and begins his trip to Barney's house. However, Fred does not tie down the containers to keep them from moving because the effort would be too time-consuming. On the way to Barney's house, Fred loses control of the truck and crashes into a guard-rail in the middle of the road. The water in the back of the truck spills out onto the street. Wilma's car which was behind Fred, gets splashed with water and the brand new paint job begins to run. In a suit against Fred, Wilma will most likely:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct There are two steps in determining breach of duty. The first is determining what happened. The second is determining whether the defendant's conduct was reasonable or unreasonable under the circumstances. This requires a jury to balance the risks and the benefits of the defendant's actions. The risk of the defendant's actions is a combination of both the damage that might occur and the probability that damage will occur. This magnitude of risk must be weighed against the benefit of the actions that defendant took. Defendant's actions will be considered unreasonable, and therefore negligent, if the foreseeable risk outweighs the benefit of the defendant's actions. The general rule is that where the risk of injury is low, but the benefit is high, the defendant's conduct is more likely to be considered reasonable. However, where the benefit of the conduct is not so high and less dangerous alternatives are available at little cost or effort, it is more likely that negligence will be found, especially if the risk of injury is higher. It is clear that the risks of harm (a water spill) in this case did not outweigh the benefit of Fred's actions (saving time). This means that Fred's actions were reasonable and therefore not negligent. Thus, Wilma will likely lose her suit and C is the correct answer.
Incorrect! There are two steps in determining breach of duty. The first is determining what happened. The second is determining whether the defendant's conduct was reasonable or unreasonable under the circumstances. This requires a jury to balance the risks and the benefits of the defendant's actions. The risk of the defendant's actions is a combination of both the damage that might occur and the probability that damage will occur. This magnitude of risk must be weighed against the benefit of the actions that defendant took. Defendant's actions will be considered unreasonable, and therefore negligent, if the foreseeable risk outweighs the benefit of the defendant's actions. The general rule is that where the risk of injury is low, but the benefit is high, the defendant's conduct is more likely to be considered reasonable. However, where the benefit of the conduct is not so high and less dangerous alternatives are available at little cost or effort, it is more likely that negligence will be found, especially if the risk of injury is higher. It is clear that the risks of harm (a water spill) in this case did not outweigh the benefit of Fred's actions (saving time). This means that Fred's actions were reasonable and therefore not negligent. Thus, Wilma will likely lose her suit and C is the correct answer.