+1-316-444-1378

1. Which of the following statements is best describes joint and several liability?A Plaintiff can obtain a judgment against two defendants who are both 50% liable and collect the full amount of the judgment from each defendant.B Plaintiff can obtain a judgment against two defendants who are both 50% liable but can only collect 50% of the judgment from each defendant.C Plaintiff can obtain a judgment against two defendants who are both 50% liable and collect the full judgment against any one of the tortfeasors.D Plaintiff can obtain a judgment against two defendants who are both 50% liable and if plaintiff collects 75% of the judgment from one tortfeasor plaintiff and still collect 50% of the judgment from the other tortfeasor2. Which of the following statements is true regarding the role of the jury in deciding unreasonableness?A Because reasonableness is a question of fact the jury always decides this issue.B Because reasonableness is a question of fact the jury always decides this issue subject to the judge s right to make the ultimate decision.C Because reasonableness is a question of law the judge always decides this issue.D The fixed standard of reasonableness approach is now a firmly established legal principle.3. Regarding deviation from custom which of the following statements is true?A Well established custom is not an appropriate test to use.B custom is not a well-received principle to show breach of duty.C Custom does not relate to the consideration of the risk calculus.D The test is whether or not the practice is widespread enough that defendant knew or should have known of the custom4. Based on your reading of the Pipher v. Parsell case which statement does not represent any of the legal principles of breach of duty considered by the court?A If actions of a passenger that cause an accident are not foreseeable negligence is still attributed to the driver.B Negligence is conduct that creates an unreasonable risk.C One main component of determining foreseeable risk was whether a reasonable person would foresee that harm might result from his actions.D Proof of negligent conduct may require examination of the defendant s conduct and any alternate conduct the defendant should have engaged in to avoid the injury caused.

Categories: Uncategorized

0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *