business homework
gen_1
11111111.docx
1. In P.A, the Supreme Court of P.A. has made a decision that you can shoot people in your home without retreating from the home as a form of self defense, if the PA Court of Common Pleas in a case makes a decision that you have to retreat from the home before defending yourself which of the following is true:
a) The PA Supreme Court must follow the Court of Common Pleas holding because this is an example of Stare Decisis
b) The PA Court of Common Pleas must follow the PA Supreme Court holding because this is an example of Stare Decisis
c) This is really a federal question and should be moved to the federal courts
d) It depends on diversity jurisdiction
2. New York passed a law requiringemployers to provide employees with a minimum of eighteen (18) weeks unpaid leave for the birth of a child. Subsequently, Congress passed a law requiring a minimum of 12 weeks of unpaid leave for the birth of a child. Which statement is correct?
a. The New York law has priority (it controls) because it was in place prior to the federal law
b. The New York law has priority because the state has exclusive authority to regulate family matters
c. The New York law controls because it is not in conflict with the federal law
d. The federal law takes precedence over the New York law
e. Both laws are null and void because of the conflict
3. On d2l we examined the case ofMiladin Kovacevicthe Binghamton University Basketball player from Serbia who nearly killed an American Business Major Student. While under arrest, Kovacevic fled the country and went back to Serbia. In terms of this situation, the American courts had what legal issue:
a. Subject matter jurisdiction
b. In Persona jurisdiction
c. Due Process
d. Diversity Jurisdiction
4. Adarand Construction is a white-owned construction firm that had bid on a sub-contract to supply guardrails to a federal highway project in Colorado. Adarand Construction had the lowest bid, but the general government contractor took a bid from a minority owned firm because the government Contractor thought it was a good idea to give a chance to minority owned businesses. According to this scenario, the courts would find this constitutional only when
a) the government can prove that there is any rational reason and for a legitimate government purpose
b) the government can show a compelling government interest and a necessity that this is the only way of achieving the compelling government purpose
c) If the government can show an important government interest and a strong relation to achieving the purpose.
d) None of the above under the 13,14,15 Amendments to the Constitutions race based distinctions are always unconstitutional.
5. Due to a bad winter, Pennsylvania has passed a law that all vehicles that travel on PA roads must have four wheel drive. In terms of this law’s constitutionality, it can best be said that the law:
A. Is Constitutional under the State’s Police Powers
B. Is Unconstitutional because it violates Substantive Due Process
C. Is Unconstitutional because it violates the commerce clause or dormant commerce clause
D. Is Constitutional because of the taxing and spending powers of the federal government.
6. New York has decided they are tired of imported Canadian Beer… Who drinks Molson Anyway… So New York has imposed a $2.00 per bottle tariff (Tax) on imported Canadian Beer entering New York. With respect to this tariff (tax):
a) New York is authorized under the commerce clause to impose taxes because of the taxing and spending powers of the United States Constitution
b) New York is not authorized to invoke this tax because the commerce clause of the US Constitution gives the federal government the exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations.
c) New York is allowed to pass this tax so long as it does not burden interstate commerce
d) New York is not authorized to pass this tax because it is an ex-post facto law.
7. You run a red light in Indiana, PA and injure a Pedestrian as the result of that. You have pled guilty in criminal court to running the red light. The law that you must stop at a red light was specifically designed to prevent injury to pedestrians. The Pedestrian (Plaintiff) sues you (Defendant) and produces a law in Indiana PA that says no car shall go through any intersection when the light is red. As a result of producing that law, the Pedestrian in the law suit must now only prove:
a) Duty
b) Duty, Breach, Causation, Damages
c) Causation
d) Damages
8. Rachel invites Lisa over to her place for a “girls night” sleep-over. Lisa has never been to Rachel’s house before. As she is climbing the stairs, she trips and falls and breaks an ankle. The reason she tripped is that there was a stair missing on the staircase at Rachel’s house. This is the only staircase at the house and is used everyday by Rachel. With respect to this situation Rachel has what if any duty
A. Owes no duty to Warn Lisa
B. Owes a duty to warn Lisa
C. Owes the same duty to Lisa that a store like Wal-Mart would owe to its customers
D. Owes a duty to record her screams
9. You have been injured by a defectively designed tractor. You purchased the tractor from a yard sale by your next door neighbor. The tractor was purchased by the neighbor last year from a Garden and Tractor store. The Garden and Tractor store purchased it from a large tractor whole saler called Clean Cut and finally the tractor was manufactured by Suzuki. In Strict Product Liability the list of people you can sue include all of the following:
A. Your neighbor, Garden and Tractor store, Clean Cut, Suzuki
B. Garden and Tractor store, Clean Cut, Suzuki
C. Your neighbor, Clean Cut, Suzuki
D. Suzuki
10. Aarika has purchased a “q-tip” a thin stick with a cotton swab on both ends. On the box of q-tips it says, not for use in cleaning the ears, to be used only on the outside of the body and not inserted into body opening. However, the company is aware that a majority of users often misuse the product in direct violation of that warning by cleaning their ears. Aarika inserts the swab into her ear and ruptures her ear drum. She sues the Q-tip manufacturer for product liability. The manufacturer’s defense says a q-tip is to be used only on the outside of the body. In terms of this defense the court should
A. Accept the manufacturer’s defense
B. Reject the manufacturer’s defense
11. If I.U.P., a state university, has a practice that immediately before each College Football Games on the PA system, after the Pledge to the Flag is given, a short 20 second prayer is given which says, “May our God Jesus Christ give us the strength to persevere, and the courage to fight, Amen”. Which statement is most likely true
a) The prayer is a violation of the separation of Church and State
b) The prayer is in violation of the freedom speech as “Fighting words”
c) The prayer is in violation of the 14th Amendment
d) The prayer is allowed under the freedom of religion clause of the first amendment
12. Mike is a land owner and the PA state government wishes to build a highway through his front lawn. They are forcing him to sell his house. However, prior to the selling of the house, Mike is entitled to a court hearing to determine its fair value and whether the Government can sell it at all. This has to be done because of
A. Substantive Due Process
B. Procedural Due Process
C. Third Amendment
D. 17th ammendment
E. They do not have to do this
13. Bobby and his Wife Judy strictly follow the religion of “guzhara” where extreme temperatures of heat and cold are used on the human body to put one into a transcendental state and, by such, be able to commune with the creator. Bobby and his wife also have a 13 year old son named Kevin. Bobby and Judy have been doing this practice for over 25 years and are considered experts at the practice and have even frequently involved Kevin in the practice . On numerous occasions, Bobby, Judy and Kevin’s have subjected their bodies to life threatening 130 degree heat for 2 hours and then dangerously plunged into an ice bath of 33 degrees. The shock it provided to their system, due to the near death experience, clarified their religious thoughts. On November 1st 2008, Bobby, Judy and Kevin participated in this same kind of religious “guzhara” event. Unfortunately Kevin,went into shock when he was transferred from the high heat to the bitter cold and he later died. At the subsequent trial for the death of Kevin
a) Bobby and Judy should escape the charges because they were known experts in their field
b) Bobby and Judy should escape the charges because they were practicing their religious freedom guaranteed under the first amendment
c) Bobby and Judy should escape the charges because Kevin knew or should have known of the dangers of things that are hot and cold.
d) Bobby and Judy will not escape the charges
14. Which “School of Thought on the Laws” basic idea is that law is shaped by logic and applying logic to the facts.
a) NaturalSchool
b) Historical School
c) Analytical School
d) Command School
15. The local I.U.P College Bully, “Devin”, meets “Kevin” outside of his business law class and says, “Kevin if you come to class next week, then after that class I am going to hit you with a tire iron (club) on your head.” The most serious crime Devin could be found guilty of is:
A. Assault
B. Battery
C. Slander
D. No crime
16. Next Week Kevin shows up to the Business Law class, but Devin reconsiders his dramatic “tire iron” threat and instead decides to play a practical joke on Kevin. He has tied a string on Kevin’s chair and as Kevin begins to sit down (not seeing Devin or the String) Devin pulls the string and the chair moves and Kevin falls and suffersa fracture of the hip, a broken Tibia, a broken ankle, and a broken pelvis. What crime(s) can Devin be charged with?
A. Battery
B. Assault
C. Both A & B
D. None of the above (no crime)
17. In the question above lets say Kevin sues Devin for the injuries He sustains and let's further assume that Devin can prove that Kevin suffers from hemo-marrow encephalitis a bone disorder that causes leeching of calcium from the bones making them prone to fractures. Devin can prove in court that had Kevin been a "normal" person without this disease the injures he would have suffered would have been no worse than a small black and blue. With all the injuries Kevin suffered the damages are $4532, what “normal” people would suffer are $104. Based on these facts the jury should award Kevin
a. $104
b. $4532
c. $2340 (aprox half)
d. $0
18. You are attending the funeral of your Business Law Professor (Did he meet Devin in some back Alley?). Most of his students stand up and give some short statement on what a noble and gracious human being he was… That is… Until… … Nadia…. Nadia stands up and lies to all in attendance that “Brion” was a despicable human being, who had committed numerous crimes including murder and rape and goes on to berate him for being a horrible and unfair professor and finally commits the outrageous act of going to “the bathroom” in the open casket. This act makes Brion’s parents vomit and pass out. After this outrage, Brion’s parents, as administrators of his estate, wish to sue. What can Nadia be sued for?
a. Slander
b. Libel
c. Intentional Infliction of emotional distress
d. Both A & C
e. No crime
19. The total list of elements of negligence are:
a. Duty, Breach of Duty, Causation, Damages
b. Duty, Standard of Care, Causation and Damages
c. Duty, Breach of Duty, Strict Liability, Damages
d. Duty, Breach of Duty, Damages
20. “Kelly” & “Jilliane”, two college friends, are walking near a swimming pool joking and laughing. Kelly turns to Jilliane and says, “You are looking so amazing today… and Jilliane says, “Yes, I am hot.” At this point Kelly says, “I can fix that” and pushes Jilliane into the pool. The push causes Jilliane to break three teeth, and Jilliane can not swim and calls for help.
Luckily “Sarah”(hero theme (dunt tad a da) is nearby and plunges into the pool to rescue Jilliane. Sarah accidentally bangs her arm on the side of the pool when she dives in and fractures her arm. Sarah then also acts negligently in the rescue because she drags Jilliane out of the water by her neck which causes Jilliane to fracture her third vertebrae paralyzing the woman from the neck down.
Jilliane is rushed to the hospital where doctor (Dion) does emergency surgery. The doctor negligently leaves a sponge in Jilliane and Jilliane dies as a result.
On her way home after the pool incident, with a broken arm, Sarah is hit and killed by a drunk driver who ran a red light and smashed into her car.
What are all the legal liabilities of Kelly?
a. Kelly can be held liable for: Jillane’s broken teeth, Sara’s broken arm, Jilliane’s broken vertebrae, Jilliane’s death, Sara’s Death.
b. Kelly can be held liable for: Jillane’s broken teeth, Jilliane’s broken vertebrae,
c. Kelly can be held liable for: Jillane’s broken teeth, Sara’s broken arm, Jilliane’s death,
d. Kelly can be held liable for: Jillane’s broken teeth, Sara’s broken arm, Jilliane’s broken vertebrae, Jilliane’s death
e. Nothing Kelly owed no duty to Jilliane
21. In class on Moodle we watched the video depiction of the jet airliner from Colgan Air that crashed outside of Buffalo New York. The families of the deceased are suing the airline for negligence. What duty did the airline allegedly violate in terms of this situation?
a. The duty to provide proper seatbelts
b. The duty to provide on time arrival
c. The duty to provide proper pilot training
d. The duty to provide airline wheels that don’t rupture
22. Brion, an attorney, goes out on a date with Baeta. After the date Baeta goes on a web site called don’t date him girl and proceeds to write Brion cheats on his wife and has a criminal record for embezzling. Assuming neither of these remarks are true, who can be sued and for what:
A. Don’t date him girl website for libel, Baeta for Libel
B. Don’t Date him girl website for slander, Baeta for libel
C. Baeta for Libel
D. Baeta for Slander
E. Nothing, this is a matter of opinion only no legal implications are involved
23. Colleen and Jordan are boyfriend and girlfriend. They are in Jordan’s car and Jordan is driving. Colleen asks Jordan to pull over for a second. Jordan does so and Colleen says, Jordan we have to talk… (Why is it nothing good ever comes after this)…Colleen continues, You are very special to me, but I just don’t see this relationship going anywhere, I think we should see other people. (which really means I’m already seeing other people). Jordan is stunned he didn’t expect this to happen. They had plans, he bought tickets to a concert, they were in love. He starts crying and says, Colleen please, don’t… don’t do this. Colleen says sorry that is the way I feel and I want to leave you and this car right now. Jordan then locks the doors and speeds off onto the highway at 65MPH with Colleen in the car and says until you say you will go back out with me, I am not pulling over. In this situation it can best be said that:
a.) Colleen can be sued for Intentional Infliction of emotional distress to Jordan
b.) Colleen can sue Jordan for False Imprisonment
c.) Colleen can be sued for conversion of property of Jordan
d.) No one has committed anything that would rise to a legal liability it’s a break up that’s all
e.) Time for Jordan to take a Prozac
24. Follow this link, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2seb49T3gI, and this http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/27/sports/ncaafootball/ea-sports-wont-make-college-video-game-in-2014.html what tort has EA Sports probably committed?
a) Misappropriation of the right to publicity
b) Libel
c) Negligence
d) Strict Liability
25. In class on d2l, (aren’t you glad you attended) we talked about the news article where the gambler had an issue with his problem gambling and lost 127 million in one year including one day where he lost 5 million and sued the Casino. The best way for the gambler to win his case would be to compare the duty the casino owed to the gambler to:
a) The duty a land owner owes to a trespasser
b) The duty a bar owes to a drunk patron
c) The duty someone owes to rescue a drowning victim
d) The duty a police officer owes to the public
26. One day you are crossing one of the Pittsburgh bridges…usually the one you didn’t want to cross anyway. There on the edge of the bridge you witness someone (you have never met) try and commit suicide by jumping off the bridge. You run over and look over the side of the bridge and see him waving his arms going I’m ok, “help, help”… You are a well qualified swimmer and could rescue him without any harm to yourself. However, you simply watch as the man drowns. The whole situation was also caught on news video and was shown on the six o’clock news. The family of the drowned victim identified you and has sued you for failure to rescue. In terms of this situation it can best be said that:
a) You will not be able to be sued because you owed no duty to rescue a stranger
b) You could lose the law suit if it is discovered you had the training and skill to rescue and could have saved the drowning man
c) You will lose the law suit because of the Good Samaritan Statute
d) You will win the law suit because of the good Samaritan Statute
27. The primary purpose of the Constitution of the United States is to:
a) Protect the country against foreign invasion
b) Limit the federal governments’ powers
c) Protect your property
d) Provide for the military
28. The debate we watched between Supreme Court Justice Scalia and Breyer over interpreting the constitution dealt with the philosophical issue of whether the Constitution is a living breathing document. If one were to say that the Constitution fits into this framework or paradigm then they are saying what:
a) That the Constitution must only be interpreted according to what the framers of the Constitution thought the words meant when it was drafted.
b) That the Constitution should be protected just as if it were a person and a life that we value.
c) That the Constitution should not be put on life support
d) That the Constitution should be interpreted according to what the words mean in the context of current society and that society’s needs.
29. The Constitution of the United States specifically Guarantees in Article 4 section 4 that the United States will be what form of government?
a) Democracy
b) Republic
c) Monarchy
d) Anarcho-syndicalist commune (the Holy Grail of Government)
30. If I told you the Statute of Limitations for a Negligence Action was Three Years what impact would that have on your case if you wanted to sue (as a plaintiff claiming an injury from negligence) a year after the 3 years had expired?
a) At trial they could reduce your damages for not bringing the case sooner
b) At trial the evidence you would need to produce would need to be stronger because the time was so long ago
c) Your case would be dismissed by the judge without ever going to trial
d) You would automatically win because it was after the statute of limitations
31. In class we watched the McDonalds’s Hot coffee depiction. In terms of the damages that were given to Stella Libeck it is best said that:
a) The Punitive damages awardwere given to punish Ms. Libeck for her failure to use caution in opening the hot coffee on her lap.
b) The Compensatory damages award were given to punish McDonald’s corporation for intentional or grossly negligent action
c) The Damages award given to Ms. Libeck were partially reduced under the theory of comparative negligence
d) The Damages award was unconstitutional
32. Embezzlement is different than larceny because:
a) Embezzlement is theft and you are stealing property you have no legal right to have in your possession.
b) Embezzlement is taking of personal property from another person by the use of force or fear of force
c) Embezzlement is taking of personal property that you have a legal right to have in your possession on behalf of someone else and converting it to personal use
d) It is the same as the crime of receiving stolen property
33. According to the Exclusionary Rule:
a. Evidence obtained from an unreasonable search and seizure cannot be used at a trial.
b. An attorney is excluded from testifying against his/her client
c. Criminals have the right to an appeal of a guilty verdict
d. A lawsuit is the exclusive remedy for violations of civil rights by the police
34. “William” is arrested for drunk driving and the officer puts him in the back of the car, on the way to police station William blurts out, “Im not drunk, I only had 7 shots of Peppermint Schnapps”. While the officer never asked William any questions, the officer did not read William his Miranda rights. William takes the case to trial and the prosecution wishes to introduce evidence of Williams statement about the Schnapps. In this situation the court should rule:
a. The evidence cannot be used at trial because the police did not read William his Miranda warnings and he had a right to remain silent.
b. The evidence cannot be used at trial because William was drunk and may not have realized what he was saying
c. The evidence can be used at trial
d. The evidence can be used at trial because of the exclusionary rule.
35. In the statute below the mens rea and the actus reus are respectively :
§ 3503. Criminal trespass (a) BUILDINGS AND OCCUPIED STRUCTURES. -- (1) A person commits an offense if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he: (i) enters, gains entry by subterfuge or surreptitiously remains in any building or occupied structure or separately secured or occupied portion thereof; or (ii) breaks into any building or occupied structure or separately secured or occupied portion thereof. (2) An offense under paragraph (1)(i) is a felony of the third degree, and an offense under subparagraph (1)(ii) is a felony of the second degree.
A.) (Mens Rea) knowing and Actus (enters/breaks into)
B.)(Mens rea) Enters/breaks into and (Actus) not licensed
C.) (Mens Rea) Felony and (Actus) third degree
D.) (Mens Rea) Subterfuge and (Actus) secured
E.) None of the above
36. “Weird Al”, has made a career of making fun of popular songs. In 2001, he made the song “Amish Paradise” as a parody of Coolio’s “Gangsters Paradise”. Coolio did not give Weird Al permission to use any portion of his song, music or lyrics. Weird Al also copied the exact musical score and even the music video footage is very similar. Coolio wishes to sue Weird Al for copyright violation. What is the legal result? In part, these are the lyrics from each song…
a) Weird Al has violated the copyright law and will owe some amount of money to Coolio.
b) Weird Al has not violated the copyright law because his use falls within an exception to the copyright law.
c) Weird Al has not violated copyright law because he was only “sampling” the music.
d) Weird Al has violated patent law not copyright law.
37. Adam is a Harvard student and he likes the music of Lady Gaga (did I spell that right?). One day on the internet he finds a file sharing web site where for no charge a user can download copyrighted music. Another user has posted a library of Lady “GAGA” music. The library contains 30 of her “best” songs and he decides to download the library of 30 songs to his computer. He keeps them on his computer, and for 5 of the songs he downloads them to his I-pod and listens to them while exercising. He does not sell them to anyone or give the songs to anyone. In terms of Adams Actions it can best be said that:
a) Adam has not violated the copyright law because he is covered under the safe harbor provision which allows users to download for personal use without paying as many as 100 songs per year.
b.) Adam has not violated the copyright law because he has not sold the songs or given them to anyone else.
c.) Adam has only violated the copyright law for the songs he downloaded to his I-pod
d.) Adam has violated the copyright law for all 30 songs.
38. Daniel and Troy have invented a new cologne for men that makes women go absolutely crazy. One day they are walking down the street and are shocked to smell their fragrance coming from a store. When they go in, they find that Paris Hilton has come up with a perfume that smells exactly like theirs. In this situation it can best be said that:
a.) Smelling like Paris Hilton, that is similar to what?... Alcohol and Pot
b.) Paris has violated patent law because she has created a fragrance that smells like the one Daniel and Troy created
c.) Paris has not violated patent law
d.) Paris has violated the patent law because patents are good for 20 years and Daniel and Troy’s perfume was created within that time frame.
39. Wildboards Company introduces a product called a "Rollerboard" for which it is granted a registered trademark. The Rollerboard is a snowboard with a removable row of wheels along the center of the underside. With the wheels attached, the user can attain extremely high speed in hard-packed snow conditions. In addition, many users have found that they can use their snowboards on streets with the wheels attached. This new use of snowboards becomes very popular and many competing snowboard makers introduce similar products. The sport becomes known generally as rollerboarding and most people refer to all such wheeled snowboards as rollerboards. The consequence of this is that:
A) Wildboards cannot stop competitors from using the term "rollerboard" for their products.
B) Competitors must pay royalties to Wildboards for using the term "rollerboard."
C) Wildboards can no longer use the name Rollerboard on its boards.
D) Competitors must put a disclaimer on their boards that they are not the original Rollerboard
40. Danny is suspected of operating an illegal drug growing operation in his home. The police have hacked into Danny’s computer and remotely taken control of his web camera that is on his computer. With that camera they get pictures of a large amount of pot and cocaine in the home. With the video evidence they get a search warrant and search the home, seize the pot and cocaine and arrest Danny. At Danny’s trial, the defense asks the Judge to exclude all evidence seized from the home as part of the search warrant. The judge should rule
a. That the evidence will be allowed because of the search warrant
b. That the evidence will be excluded because of the 4th amendment
c. That the evidence will be allowed under the warrantless search provisions
d. That the evidence will be excluded because of the second amendment
41. Adam consults his lawyer, Brion, to help out with a seatbelt ticket. While in Brion’s office, Adam tells Brion that he has stolen $5000 from his employer, but that the police and the employer don’t know about it yet and asks for Brion’s advice about what to do. Brion should
a. Stop the conversation as soon as possible because a lawyer cannot be consulted regarding a crime that the police don’t know about yet
b. Inform Adam that according to the rules of attorney conduct he must report the activity directly to the police
c. Inform Adam that anything about past uncharged crimes will be their little secret and he won’t tell anyone about them
d. Inform Adam’s employer about the $5000 and let them investigate
e. Inform Adam that his billable hour rate just went to $5000 per hour.
42. In class we talked about sleepwalking and even watched a news story about a sleepwalking defense. Assuming someone were really sleepwalking why would that be a defense to a criminal charge?
a) It would negate the voluntary nature of the act
b) It would mean that the person was legally insane
c) It would mean that the victim was responsible for the actions of the sleepwalker
d) It would not excuse the crime but might reduce its severity… the level of the charge
43. Scientists have altered the genetic codes of cats and have given cats the ability to glow in the dark like a firefly or lightning bug. (True actually). The scientist that has done this wishes to patent the new “Glow cat” thus preventing others from creating this kind of cat. To be legally correct you should tell him….
a. That biological life forms cannot be patented
b. That it is illegal to alter life forms in such a manner under the ethical treatment of animals federal statute.
c. That the patent will be valid for 20 years and the scientist must explain exactly how he made this “invention” to get the patent
d. That he can trademark the cat but not patent it
44. Questions 44-46 refer to the following fact pattern.
Lee owns and operates a drug store. In 1997 he modernized the store and, among other things, installed a new front door. The door was made entirely of transparent glass framed by a very narrow metal strip. The handle is flat, 3 inch by 4 inch pedal, which one pushes by hand to enter the store and which is mounted below chest height, on a small metal device set in the glass next to the latch. There are no signs marking or warnings on the glass itself.
Ariste, the architect in charge of the modernization, specified that the door be constructed of tempered glass. However, before beginning construction, Lee Talked to Glass the president of Glass services Company, a manufacturer and supplier of all types of glass, who told Lee that one half inch thick plate glass is half the price of tempered glass and that the great majority of residential and small businesses use plate glass for such doors. Futhermore, Mr Glass told Lee that plate glass was super safe and could withstand considerable pressure.
Thereafter, Lee instructed Ariste to install the front door using plate glass rather than tempered glass. Ariste agreed but warned Lee that tempered glass is five times stronger than plate glass; is more difficult to scratch; can withstand a blow from a hammer; and even breaks into pieces with rounded edges if broken.
None the less, Ariste followed Lee instruction and purchased the plate glass from Glass Services Company. Ariste then went ahead and hired Culver, an independent contractor, who installed the new plate glass front door. Several months later Mrs. Shopper and her nine year old son, Victor, went to Lee’s Drug store to purchase some merchandise. As they approached the store, Victor was skipping ahead of his mother. Until he was within a few steps of the door he thought it was open; when he realized it in fact was closed, he slowed down and, while still going faster than walking pushed his hand against the pedal like handle to push open the door. His hand slid off the pedal and at the same time there was a “kind of exploding noise” The plate glass shattered and broke, cutting Victor’s hand and wrist.
44. If Mrs Shopper, on behalf of her son, asserts a claim against, Glass Services Company based on strict liability, the plaintiff will?
e) Prevail, if the plate glass was defective
f) Prevail, because Mr. Glass represented that the [plate glass is super safe
g) Not prevail, if culver negligently installed the plate glass door
h) Not prevail, because there was no warning on the door
45. If Mrs. Shopper, on behalf of her son, asserts a claim against Culver based on strict liability, the plaintiff will
a) Prevail, if the plate glass was defective when installed
b) Prevail, unless Victor was negligent when he pushed open the door
c) Not prevail, because Culver was not engaged in the sale of the plate glass
d) Not prevail, because Culver had no contractual relationship with the plaintiffs.
46. If Mrs Shopper on behalf of her son, asserts a claim against Lee based on Negligence and establishes negligent manufacture of the plate glass by the galss services company, the plaintiff will?
a) Prevail, because Lee is liable for its suppliers negligence
b) Prevail, because Lee instructed its architect to install plate glass rather than the more durable tempered glass
c) Not prevail, unless Lee could have reasonably been expected to discover the defect prior to installation.
d) Not prevail, if Lee introduces evidence that the door had never broken before.
ESSAY Worth 25%
Analyze the following case and discuss possible theory and defenses for negligence and strict products liability. What does this mean… I mean look at the scenario presented below and tell me where you thought the company may have been negligent, show how, ie the four elements and discuss each, then pick a theory for strict product liability and analyze that discuss how the facts fit into the theory, then come up with defenses ie to protect the company for both negligence and strict products liability and explain them and how they apply. See slides.
On August 31, 2001, Justine, visiting from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, accompanied her brothers, aunt, and a family friend, Zemba Mekanisi, on an outing to Knott's Berry Farm amusement park. Justine's brothers translated the warning signs on the rides for her, as she was fluent in French and Lingala but not English. After the group warmed up on the "Jaguar" roller coaster, which one of the party described as "rather tame," Justine wanted "something more exciting," and led the way to Montezooma's Revenge, where the group waited approximately 15 minutes watching the ride go through several cycles.
As the group stood in line, Emmanuel read to his sister the posted ride instructions and warning, as follows: "No smoking, eating, or drinking. [P] No loose articles. [P] You must be in good health to take this high-speed roller coaster ride (free from heart & nervous disorders, weak back or neck, or other physical limitations). [P] No expectant mothers." The warning prompted no concerns in the group, except that Emmanuel advised Justine to discard her chewing gum.
Around 7:00 p.m., Emmanuel, Justine, their aunt, and Zemba boarded the roller coaster, and Enoch and Ofil awaited the next cycle, first in line. Justine laughed and screamed with excitement during the 36-second ride. Approximately six seconds before the ride ended, Justine turned back to Emmanuel, seated behind her, and yelled, "yes, yes" excitedly. But as the roller coaster pulled into the platform area, Ofil heard Justine mumbling, "Jesus, Jesus, Jesus!" Her family looked on helplessly as she began convulsing and lost consciousness. Another rider attempted mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, as did paramedics at the scene and en route to the hospital, where Justine struggled back from cardiac arrest at least three times, but died at 1:35 a.m. the next morning.
According to one of the plaintiffs' experts, Dr. Claus P. Speth, Justine "had no known personal or family history of aneurysms, migraines, hypertension, alcoholism, cigarette smoking, contraceptives or known connective tissue diseases (these are some of the suspected risk factors for development and rupture of cerebral aneurysms). . . . Most notably, although she occasionally had transient headaches associated with menstrual periods, there was no history of an unusual, different headache at any time preceding August 31, 2001." Justine's mother described her as a "strong" person, who "could do anything" and "did everything," despite a sickle cell disease diagnosis, which generally posed "no problem." She had suffered a sickle crisis in January 2001, but "was otherwise in good health," requiring "no medications, and no medical restrictions had been placed upon her."
The coroner's autopsy determined Justine's cause of death to be "Anoxic encephalopathy" due to "Acute subarachnoid hemorrhage," in turn "DUE TO: Ruptured berry aneurysm, left middle cerebral [*6] artery." Based on his review of autopsy slide specimens, Speth described the aneurysm as "round, about 4 mm in diameter," having "a generally thin wall" and "arising in the asymmetric bifurcation of the involved arteries." Speth concluded the aneurysm was "preexistent" and found "no evidence of prior hemorrhage or leakage."
A safety engineer from the Department of Industrial Relations inspected the roller coaster after the accident, including the car in which Justine rode, and concluded the ride "was operating within the manufacturer's specifications."
The amusement park also has a "Steel Force" roller coaster that caused a woman to suffer "damaging pools of blood on both sides of her brain (multiple bilateral subdural hematoma) . . . ." Plaintiff’s expert said that the declaration of industrial engineer, David A. Thompson, who opined that a satisfactory, effective warning must caution riders that "even if they believe they are in good health, the ride can cause, and has caused in the past, serious injury including but not limited to: fractures, loss of consciousness, paralysis, brain bleeds and death, Ride at Your Own Risk!" Justine's brothers declared that if there had been such a warning, they would not have permitted her to ride Montezooma's Revenge.
