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
Martha and Stewart own large tracts of land that sit next to each other. Martha has turned her land into a nature reserve where she has landscaped many different kinds of gardens and grown dozens of different exotic plants and flowers. Stewart has turned his land into a cattle farm where he breeds and raises cattle for sale to the meat packing industry. Stewart has spent a lot of money making sure his cattle are fenced in properly. One night, a terrible storm sweeps through the area and the fence separating Martha and Stewart's property is destroyed. After the storm has passed, some of Stewart's cattle wander onto Martha's property and begin grazing on a rare breed of petunia that she has developed. If Martha sues Stewart for the damage to her flowers, she will probably:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Whenever you see a fact pattern involving damage caused by animals, the first thing you should think of is strict liability. The general rule is that, where livestock trespass on the plaintiff's land, the defendant (the owner of the livestock) will be strictly liable both for the trespass and for any damage caused by his livestock. Therefore, Martha will win her suit and C is the correct answer.
Incorrect! Whenever you see a fact pattern involving damage caused by animals, the first thing you should think of is strict liability. The general rule is that, where livestock trespass on the plaintiff's land, the defendant (the owner of the livestock) will be strictly liable both for the trespass and for any damage caused by his livestock. Therefore, Martha will win her suit and C is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 2
Samantha is a devout animal lover and she has many pets. Her favorite is her beige and white cat Roophis. Roophis is an unusual cat because, unlike most cats that are gentle and friendly, Roophis is an unfriendly cat that has a tendency of biting people who try to pick him up. One afternoon, Samantha's friend Jacob comes by to say hello. Jacob has never seen Roophis and, being a cat lover himself, bends down and tries to pick Roophis up. When Jacob does, Roophis bites Jacob on the hand. If Jacob were to sue Samantha for his injuries, he would probably:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct The application of strict liability in cases involving animals partially hinges on whether the harm inflicted by the animal was the result of a dangerous propensity and whether that dangerous propensity was normal for the animal. Owner of domestic animals with known dangerous propensities that are not typical to those classes of animal are strictly liable for all harm done as a result of those propensities. Here, Roophis had a propensity for biting that was not normal for the kind of animal he is. Further, Samantha knew about Roophis' propensity for biting. Therefore, Jacob can recover for his injuries and B is the correct answer.
Incorrect! The application of strict liability in cases involving animals partially hinges on whether the harm inflicted by the animal was the result of a dangerous propensity and whether that dangerous propensity was normal for the animal. Owner of domestic animals with known dangerous propensities that are not typical to those classes of animal are strictly liable for all harm done as a result of those propensities. Here, Roophis had a propensity for biting that was not normal for the kind of animal he is. Further, Samantha knew about Roophis' propensity for biting. Therefore, Jacob can recover for his injuries and B is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 3
Sam is a devout dog lover and she owns several dogs. Her favorite is her Pit-Bull named Bev. Although Sam has learned to control Bev, Pit-Bulls are typically vicious and have a propensity of attacking anybody who gets close to them, and Bev is no different. One day, Sam's friend Cher comes by to say hello. Cher knows that Bev is an ill tempered dog but Cher tries to pet Bev anyway. Bev attacks Cher and seriously injures Cher's hand and arm. If Cher were to sue Sam for her injuries, Cher would probably:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct The application of strict liability in cases involving animals partially hinges on whether the harm inflicted by the animal was the result of a dangerous propensity and whether that dangerous propensity was normal for the animal. Where the defendant owns a domestic animal that has dangerous propensities that are normal for the animal, the defendant is not strictly liable for the injuries caused by those propensities. Here, Bev's dangerous propensities were normal for the type of dog she is. Therefore, Cher will not be able to sue Sam for her injuries and D is the correct answer
Incorrect! The application of strict liability in cases involving animals partially hinges on whether the harm inflicted by the animal was the result of a dangerous propensity and whether that dangerous propensity was normal for the animal. Where the defendant owns a domestic animal that has dangerous propensities that are normal for the animal, the defendant is not strictly liable for the injuries caused by those propensities. Here, Bev's dangerous propensities were normal for the type of dog she is. Therefore, Cher will not be able to sue Sam for her injuries and D is the correct answer
Question 4
Sam is a devout dog lover and she owns several dogs. Her favorite is her Pit-Bull named Bev. Although Sam has learned to control Bev, Pit-Bulls are typically vicious and have a propensity of attacking anybody who gets close to them, and Bev is no different. Sam normally lets Bev run around without a leash in the front yard of her house. One day, Sam's friend Cher comes by to say hello. When Cher comes through the front gate, Bev attacks her and seriously injures Cher's hand and arm. If Cher were to sue Sam for her injuries, Cher would probably:
Correct Although a defendant who owns a domestic animal that has dangerous propensities which are normal for the animal is not strictly liable for the injuries caused by those propensities, the defendant could be liable for negligence if he did not use an appropriate level of care in keeping the animal. Here, Sam let a vicious dog run, unleashed, in her yard. This is not appropriate care in keeping this kind of animal. Therefore, Cher can sue Sam for her injuries and A is the correct answer.
Incorrect! Although a defendant who owns a domestic animal that has dangerous propensities which are normal for the animal is not strictly liable for the injuries caused by those propensities, the defendant could be liable for negligence if he did not use an appropriate level of care in keeping the animal. Here, Sam let a vicious dog run, unleashed, in her yard. This is not appropriate care in keeping this kind of animal. Therefore, Cher can sue Sam for her injuries and A is the correct answer.
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 5
Sam is a devout lover of animals and she has several exotic pets. Her favorite is Tony, her pet tiger. Tigers, being wild animals by nature, have a propensity to vicious behavior. Sam is unaware of tigers' propensity toward violence and does not keep Tony in a cage. Instead, she allows him to wander loose around her property. Cher, a close friend of Sam's drops by to say hello one day. Cher sees Tony sunning himself on the lawn and goes over to play with him. Tony sees Cher, charges her and mauls her. If Cher sues Sam for her injuries, Cher will probably:
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Where a plaintiff is injured by the defendant's wild animals, the defendant is strictly liable even for harm caused by the animals' normal dangerous propensities. Further, it is not necessary that the defendant know about the dangerous propensities before the plaintiff is injured. Here, Tony was a wild animal and so Sam will be held liable to any injury Tony causes, even if the injury is caused by Tony's natural propensities. The fact that Sam did not know of a tiger's natural propensity for violence is immaterial. Therefore, B is the correct answer.
Incorrect! Where a plaintiff is injured by the defendant's wild animals, the defendant is strictly liable even for harm caused by the animals' normal dangerous propensities. Further, it is not necessary that the defendant know about the dangerous propensities before the plaintiff is injured. Here, Tony was a wild animal and so Sam will be held liable to any injury Tony causes, even if the injury is caused by Tony's natural propensities. The fact that Sam did not know of a tiger's natural propensity for violence is immaterial. Therefore, B is the correct answer.