Quiz 9: Strict Liability

Strict liability in tort covers liability for harm caused by products.

Liability for harm caused by wild animals requires a showing of negligence or the intent to harm.

The owner of a wild animal must have actual knowledge of its dangerous propensity to be liable for the harm caused by that propensity.

Every dog is entitled to one free bite.

Contributory negligence is a defense to the tort of strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities or conditions.

Assumption of the risk is a defense to the tort of strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities or conditions.

Neighbors are injured when Ted explodes a stick of dynamite in his back yard in a residential neighborhood. A)To recover for their injuries, the neighbors must show that Ted was negligent. B)To recover for their injuries, the neighbors do not have to show that Ted was negligent. C)To recover for their injuries, the neighbors must show that Ted intended their injuries. D)To recover for their injuries, the neighbors must show that Ted violated a safety statute.

Ralph's cat is very friendly except when a stranger touches its tail.One day a stranger tries to pet the cat but is badly scratched when the petting includes the cat's tail. A)Ralph is strictly liable for the injury caused by the cat if Ralph was negligent in preventing the injury. B)Ralph is strictly liable for the injury caused by the cat because the cat's tendency to injure people takes it out of the category of domestic animals. C)Ralph is strictly liable for the injury caused by the cat if Ralph knew that the cat had caused similar injuries in the past. D)Ralph is strictly liable for the injury caused by the cat if the cat did not have a dangerous propensity.

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -animal habituated to live among humans

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -but for or substantial factor

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -being the foreseeable consequence of the original risk

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -responsibility for harm whether caused innocently, intentionally, or negligently

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -animal in the state of nature

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -a tendency to cause damage or harm

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -actual cause and legal cause

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -the failure of the plaintiff to take reasonable precautions for his or her own safety

MATCHING a.strict liability b.wild animal c.actual cause d.dangerous propensity e.proximate cause f.domestic animal g.legal cause h.assumption of the risk i.contributory negligence -knowing and voluntary acceptance of a danger

Give three names for responsibility regardless of fault.

List three main categories of torts.

What is a major distinction between strict liability torts and intentional torts?

If the plaintiff is not able to establish the elements of strict liability for abnormally dangerous conditions or activities, what other theories of liability should he or she explore to cover the damage defendant caused to the plaintiff's land?

When is a condition or activity abnormally dangerous for purposes of imposing strict liability?

What did the Rylands case hold?