True/False 1. The common law was largely consistent with concepts of virtue ethics (e., fault, mens rea) which formed the original basis for our...

True/False

1. The common law was largely consistent with concepts of virtue ethics (e.g., fault, mens rea) which formed the original basis for our country's Tort and Criminal law.

2. Defendants are prosecutable for their criminal acts regardless of whether done for their own benefit or the benefit of another.

3. In a criminal case, the accused and his lawyer are not allowed to discover the prosecutor's evidence case until after the trial is over.

4. The doctrine of strict liability does not apply to abnormally dangerous activities.

5. To commit the tort of assault, the plaintiff must prove (1) defendant intended to create (2) reasonable fear of an (3) offensive hitting, touching or battery in the plaintiff, all three of these elements must be present.

6. The doctrine of strict liability applies only to wild animals who have attacked a human being and done some harm in the past.

7. Some Torts are also crimes.

8. The prosecution in a criminal case must establish with clear and convincing evidence that the defendant committed a criminal act.

9. In a negligence case, you can have your damages reduced or denied if you voluntarily, knowingly, assume a reasonable risk the seriousness of which you know and appreciate..

10. Strict liability is liability without fault.

11. Truth is a good affirmative defense even in cases where defendant is accused of defaming and proof establishes the defamatory statement did actual damage to the reputation of the plaintiff.

12. Joint and several liability was created by the common law courts, to shift the loss from an innocent victim who had done no wrong, onto the wrong-doers who were partially at fault and who would have to pay another wrongdoer's share of the damages when that other could not be made to pay.

13. The common law crimes have now been, for the most part, codified or replaced by statutory laws.

14. At common law the prosecution had to prove a mental intent called "mens rea" to get a conviction under the common law.

15. Evidence if not shown to be relevant should not be admitted and can be challenged as an error by either side..

16. At common law punitive damages were awarded only to plaintiff to deter defendant from future acts of a malicious nature (i.e. very bad acts or acts with evil intentions).

17. Under the Indiana comparative fault act some defendants who may be up to 49% at fault will not have to pay anything in cases where plaintiff is at least 51% at fault.

18. The Congressional Tort reform act of 1995, relieved auditing accountants of joint and several liability for helping to defraud investors brought under the federal securities' law.

19. Accountants can no longer be federally prosecuted for the crime of aiding and abetting securities fraud under the Denver Bank decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in 1994.

20. A litigant must demand (request) a jury trial and if no one does the court will treat it as waived (presumed waived).

21. Intentional Torts (e.g., Trespass, battery, assault, defamation) only require proof that the defendant did the act which constitute the Tort one need not prove intent to injure or cause loss although injury or loss must be shown to collect compensatory damages. An exception is made for defamation cases where there is a presumption harm and loss of reputation for which the jury can assign special damages as they determine them,

22. If the Securities and Exchange Commission files a complaint against the CEO of Disney Corporation in order to both recover from him misappropriated corporate money and to hold the CEO liable for fines; it will have to prove he violated the securities laws beyond a reasonable doubt.

23. The function of the jury is to decide questions of fact, for example guilt or innocence.

24. Punitive damages are can only be imposed in cases where the plaintiff has suffered extreme pain or horrendous suffering.

25. Compensatory damages include amounts awarded for pain and suffering.

26. If no harm or injury results from an act of trespassing on a privately owned beach, then the plaintiff can still recover compensatory damages from the trespasser, but not punitive damages.

27. In a civil case, both sides are allowed to discover all evidence and testimony that the opposing side uses before trial. This enables them to more easily negotiate a settlement; and thus saves the taxpayers the cost of an extended trial.

28. The corporate management by their policies and practices can create a corporate culture which encourages unethical behavior in lower-level employees.

29. In most States where a negligence case is brought, the plaintiffs can have their damages reduced or denied if they voluntarily, knowingly, assume a reasonable risk the seriousness of which they know and appreciate..

30. One of the required elements of a product liability suit based on strict liability is a failure to exercise a reasonable degree of care.

Multiple Choice:

31. In Ohio, they have 'modified comparative fault.' Assuming that Al's eyes are injured by Tom's negligent operation of a machine while both of them worked together in Ohio. A jury decides that Tom is 50% at fault for injuries to Al's eyes; they also decide that Al is contributorily negligent, and Al is therefore also 50% at fault for his own injury. If the jury also decides that $500,000 is adequate as compensatory damages for the loss of Al's eyesight. How much money can Al recover from Tom given the jury's determination of these facts.

a. $500,000 b. $250,000 c. 0

32. Assume the same facts as in questions 31 above but that the accident and injury occurred in Indiana after 1985, and that the Indiana rule of 'Modified Comparative Negligence' applies. How much money can Al recover from Tom for the loss of his eyesight.

a. $500,000 b. $250,000 c. 0

33. Compensatory damages include as damages. (Give the most inclusive and complete answer)

a. Medical expenses, property damaged or destroyed, lost wages, pain & suffering, and aan amount to punish the defendant

b. Medical expenses, property damaged or destroyed, lost wages, pain & suffering.

c. Medical expenses, property damaged or destroyed, lost wages.

d. Medical expenses and property damaged or destroyed.

e. Medical expenses.

34. Which of the following does not have to be proven to win a case based on strict liability for a dangerously defective product.

a. Product was sold by defendant

b. Product was unreasonably dangerous when sold

c. The defendant was negligent

d. The product caused an injury or other loss to the plaintiff

35. In regard to punitive damages, which of the following is not true

a. Pain and suffering are basis the for punitive damages

b. Today punitive damages have to be proportional to compensatory damages

c. At common law damages were set higher based on the need to deter wealthy defendants

d. Punitive damages are rewarded in cases where malice is proven

36. Which of the following is not required to be proven to hold a defendant liable for negligent conduct.

a. Intent to do the harm d. Physical injury or financial loss

b. Duty e. Proximate Cause

c. Breach of Duty

37. Which of the following is considered an animal with known dangerous propensities.

a. Monkeys d. A dog declared illegal by the city

b. A trained attack dog e. All of the above

c. Alligators

38. Virtue ethics -

a. Stresses character and developing good habits

b. stresses our individuality and independence from one another

c. creates a duty that we perfect our moral motivation and intentions

d. guarantees optimization of our choices for the communities' moral, economic/social lives

39. Martha owns a demolition company, which destroys old buildings in order to build new ones. If a passerby is injured by an explosion during a demolition by Martha's crew, under the theory of strict liability Martha must pay for the injury

a. Only if the crew intended to injure the passerby.

b. Only if the crew knew of the normal consequences of its actions.

c. Only if the crew failed to take every and all precautions to insure safety to others.

d. Whether or not the crew was at fault.

40. Kelly is injured when she slips and falls on Lee's sidewalk, she sues for negligence. To determine whether Lee owed a duty of care to Kelly, Lee is subject to the standard of a ___________________________.

a. Realistic person.

b. reasonable person

c. recognizable person

d. reliable person

41. A majority of states have adopted comparative negligence similar to California, in these states the comparative negligence rule means that

a. The Plaintiff's recovery of damages are reduced by the degree of their own fault

b. All defendants have to pay to the extent they are able but only to the degree of their fault

c. If a state has Joint &Several Liability the defendants might pay more than their share.

d. All of the above

42. Which of the following might be a defect creating strict liability for the sale of a product

a. An unreasonably dangerous design

b. Failure to place a warning on a product that has a known unreasonable risk

c. An advertisement encourages the unreasonably dangerous use of the product

d. The product made was dangerously flawed e. All of the above

43. Mark intentionally pushes Don. Don falls to the ground and breaks his arm. Mark is liable for the battery

a. Only if Mark knew he would break Don's arm.

b. Only if Mark had a bad motive for pushing Don.

c. Only if Mark intended to break Don's arm.

d. If Mark intended to push Don.

44. A train's brakes malfunction and it rolls towards maintenance workers on the tracks. Everyone gets out of the way except Dick, who wants to show off. Dick is hit by the train and sues the brake's manufacturer. The manufacturer can raise the defense of

a. Assumption of risk.

b. Commonly known danger.

c. Product misuse.

d. None of the above.

45. Which of the following is not an animal with known dangerous propensities.

a. Spiders d. A Skunk

b. A trained Security Dog e. All of the above

c. A domesticated ferret

46.Which of the following is required to be proven to hold a defendant liable for negligent conduct.

a. Proximate Cause d. Physical injury or financial loss

b. Duty e. All of the above

c. Breach of Duty

47. In California, they have 'comparative fault.' Assuming that Al's eyes are injured by Tom's negligent operation of a machine while both of them worked together in California. A jury decides that Tom is 50% at fault for injuries to Al's eyes; they also decide that Al is contributorily negligent, and Al is therefore also 50% at fault for his own injury. If the jury also decides that $500,000 is adequate as compensatory damages for the loss of Al's eyesight. How much money can Al recover from Tom given the juries' finding of facts.

a. $500,000 b. $250,000 c. 0

48. Assume that all of the facts are as above but that the accident and injury occur in the state of Indiana in 1984 prior to the passage of the 'Comparative Fault Act,' at that time Indiana still followed the common law rule regarding contributory negligence. How much could Al recover.

a. $500,000 b. $250,000 c. 0

49. Assume the same facts as in questions 47 above but that the accident and injury occur in Indiana after 1985, and that the Indiana rule of 'Modified Comparative Negligence' applies. How much money can Al recover from Tom

a. $500,000 b. $250,000 c. 0

50. Assume the same facts as in Question 47 above, except that the accident and injury occur in the state of Ohio, and that the Ohio rule of 'Modified Comparative Negligence' is applied. How much can Al recover.

a. $500,000 b. $250,000 c. 0