Question 1

Bob owns a small carpet company.After a dispute,his best salesman left the company and was hired by a competitor.A client who recently had carpet installed by Bob's company has initiated legal action on the basis of a statement made to him by the former salesman,who told the client that he had received a product of inferior quality.The former employee also told the client that Bob does this frequently.He has committed a slanderous act that is an intentional tort.

Accepted Answer

Slander is a type of intentional tort that involves making false and damaging statements about someone. In this case, the former salesman made false statements to the client about the quality of the product and Bob's business practices, which could harm Bob's reputation and lead to financial losses.

Question 2

Mr.Jones is tired of people trespassing on his private beach and ignoring the signs that tell them to keep out.He plants broken glass in the sand just inside the line of his property and several adult trespassers are injured.Since Mr.Jones failed to treat them with common humanity,and acted with reckless disregard of their presence on his property,he will be liable to them for the injury caused by the broken glass.

Accepted Answer

Mr. Jones acted negligently and intentionally caused harm to the trespassers, which makes him liable for their injuries. Planting broken glass with the knowledge that it could injure someone is not treating them with common humanity and shows reckless disregard for their safety.

Question 3

The Sampson Hair Products company is sued by a user who contracted a painful rash from using its shampoo.If Sampson manufactured the product in the same way and to the same standard as a reasonable shampoo manufacturer,and the rash was simply the result of an unusual allergy,Sampson will not be held liable.

Accepted Answer

If Sampson followed industry standard manufacturing practices and the rash was caused by an unusual allergy, then they cannot be held liable for the user's reaction. This is because manufacturers cannot be expected to anticipate every possible allergic reaction, as long as they followed standard protocols for creating the product.

Question 4

A newspaper cartoon depicted a well-known international entrepreneur as a greedy villain dressed as Robin Hood who was "stealing from the poor and giving to himself."
-The entrepreneur is precluded from seeking damages from the cartoonist because cartoons are exempt from defamation laws.

Accepted Answer

While cartoons are often protected under freedom of speech laws, they are not automatically exempt from defamation laws. If the cartoonist made false and damaging statements about the entrepreneur in the cartoon, the entrepreneur may have grounds to sue for defamation.

Question 5

A highly corrosive liquid that is stored on the property of Acme Waste Disposal leaks from its container and seeps into the foundations of the business next door,badly damaging the building.Acme will be liable only if the injured party can prove Acme was negligent.

Accepted Answer

Under strict liability laws, a company can be held liable for damages caused by its operations or activities, such as storing hazardous materials, without the need for the injured party to prove negligence.

Question 6

Zelda was enraged when another driver cut her off,so she deliberately rammed his car.This was a crime but not a tort.

Accepted Answer

This statement is incorrect. Deliberately ramming someone's car is not only a crime, but also a tort (civil wrong). It is considered an intentional tort, which means the defendant acted with the intent to cause harm or knew with substantial certainty that such harm would result.

Question 7

Alfie intends to sue Petula for negligence.As a general rule,absent any unusual circumstances,Alfie will not win unless he can prove to the court that it is more likely than not that what he alleges about Petula's actions is true.

Accepted Answer

This statement accurately reflects the standard of proof for negligence claims in most jurisdictions. The plaintiff must prove the elements of negligence by a preponderance of the evidence, which means it is more likely than not that the defendant's alleged actions caused the harm.

Question 8

A newspaper cartoon depicted a well-known international entrepreneur as a greedy villain dressed as Robin Hood who was "stealing from the poor and giving to himself."
-The newspaper could successfully defend any action taken by the entrepreneur by invoking fair comment.

Accepted Answer

The statement made in the cartoon is an assertion of fact, rather than a comment on a matter of public interest. Fair comment can only be invoked for opinions or comments based on facts that are true or substantially true. Since the cartoon is making a factual assertion that may be damaging to the reputation of the entrepreneur, it would not be protected under fair comment.

Question 9

Bob owns a small carpet company.After a dispute,his best salesman left the company and was hired by a competitor.A client who recently had carpet installed by Bob's company has initiated legal action on the basis of a statement made to him by the former salesman,who told the client that he had received a product of inferior quality.The former employee made the statement in good faith.The former employee has committed a slanderous act that is an intentional tort.

Accepted Answer

Slander is a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation. Since the statement was made in good faith, it is not considered slanderous or an intentional tort.

Question 10

Teresa is suing the Driver Trucking Co.because she was injured when one of its trucks negligently crashed into the bus shelter in which she was standing.Since Driver Trucking can do nothing to protect itself from its driver's negligence,it is unfair to hold the company liable for its employees' actions.

Accepted Answer

It is a well-established legal principle that employers can be held liable for the negligent actions of their employees if those actions occur within the scope of employment. Therefore, Driver Trucking can be held liable for the accident caused by its driver, even if the company itself did nothing to directly contribute to the accident.

Question 11

Arthur owns a boarded-up house.Kids sometimes break in and play there,and he often has to yell at them to frighten them away.He has posted "No Trespassing" signs.He will not be liable if any of the children are injured on his property.

Accepted Answer

Even though Arthur has posted "No Trespassing" signs, he still may be liable if any of the children are injured on his property. He has a duty to ensure that his property is reasonably safe, and if he fails to take adequate measures to protect against foreseeable harm to trespassing children, he could be found negligent and held liable for any injuries that result.

Question 12

Martha,a hairdresser,applied too much peroxide to Meagan's hair when she was colouring it,causing it to break off at the roots.Meagan must show that Martha had the necessary mental element for this tort.

Accepted Answer

In tort law, negligence does not require a mental element or intent; Meagan only needs to prove that Martha breached her duty of care, causing damage.

Question 13

Dave was injured in a hang-gliding accident at a hang-gliding school,and would like to sue the owners of the school.Before they would allow him to take classes,the owners of the school had Dave sign a document that said that the school would not be responsible,legally or physically,for Dave's safety.This kind of document is called a release.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Dave was injured in a hang-gliding accident...

Question 14

Winston regularly takes a shortcut across his neighbour's backyard to shorten his walk home.His wife informed him that she had been told by their neighbour that he does not like Winston taking that shortcut,but Winston says "I'm not doing any damage.There's nothing he can do about it." Winston is wrong.

Accepted Answer

The neighbour has the legal right to control access to their property, and if Winston continues to use the shortcut despite being told not to, the neighbour may take legal action against him.

Question 15

A newspaper cartoon depicted a well-known international entrepreneur as a greedy villain dressed as Robin Hood who was "stealing from the poor and giving to himself."
-The entrepreneur is precluded from seeking damages from the publisher of the newspaper because cartoons are exempt from defamation laws.

Accepted Answer

Cartoons are not completely exempt from defamation laws. While they do have more leeway in portraying public figures, they can still be held liable for defamation if the cartoon goes beyond reasonable criticism or becomes malicious. The cartoon described in the scenario may be seen as crossing that line and could potentially lead to a successful defamation claim by the entrepreneur.

Question 16

Dave and Ray are teammates on their city's rugby team.Ray was injured early in the season and is unable to play for the remainder of the year.Dave forgot his mouthguard on the day of a game and borrowed Ray's mouthguard,which,although it was medically formed for Ray's mouth,fit Dave fairly well.During a game Dave received a high tackle and lost several of his teeth.His attempt to sue Ray as well as the mouthguard manufacturer will be successful actions.

Accepted Answer

Dave cannot successfully sue Ray as Ray did not cause his injury, and it was Dave's decision to use a mouthguard that was not fitted for his mouth. Additionally, the mouthguard manufacturer is not at fault as the mouthguard fit Dave fairly well and was not defective.

Question 17

Annie was furious because the new car she bought kept breaking down and the dealer would only repair it according to their contract,and not replace it.Annie made a huge yellow lemon-shaped sign,and walked up and down outside the dealership.The sign said "This is what they really sell here." The dealer could sue her in tort and win.

Accepted Answer

Annie's sign is a form of defamation, specifically trade libel, which involves making false or disparaging statements about a business's products or services. The dealer could sue her for damages caused by the sign, and would likely win since the statements are false and damaging to their business.

Question 18

Andrew,a lawyer,failed to do a proper title search of a property that resulted in his clients' actually owning only two-thirds of the property that they thought they had bought.Andrew will be held to the standard of care expected of the reasonable lawyer.

Accepted Answer

As a lawyer, Andrew had a duty of care towards his clients and that duty requires him to carry out a proper title search before advising his clients to go ahead with the purchase of the property. Failing to do so resulted in his clients owning only two-thirds of the property they expected to buy. Therefore, Andrew can be held responsible for his negligence and will be held to the standard of care that is expected of a reasonable lawyer.

Question 19

James and Mary are artists who have a studio in an industrial part of the city.They decide to live in the studio,which is not against local zoning by-laws,but find themselves disturbed at night by the noise and light from a nearby railway marshalling yard.They decide to institute a nuisance suit against the railway since their enjoyment of their property has been seriously affected.They will be unsuccessful.

Accepted Answer

The answer of James and Mary are artists who have...

Question 20

Jason,a department store detective,saw Andrew slip some merchandise into his pocket.Jason followed him out of the store,and stopped Andrew without touching him.Jason then quietly and politely asked Andrew to accompany him to the security office.Andrew agreed,but when his pockets were searched,nothing was found.Andrew can successfully sue the department store for false imprisonment.

Accepted Answer

Andrew cannot successfully sue for false imprisonment because he voluntarily agreed to accompany Jason to the security office without being physically restrained or coerced.

Quiz 2: Tort Law

A newspaper cartoon depicted a well-known international entrepreneur as a greedy villain dressed as Robin Hood who was "stealing from the poor and giving to himself." -The entrepreneur is precluded from seeking damages from the cartoonist because cartoons are exempt from defamation laws.