LEG 110 Final Exam 100% Correct Answers

LEG 110 Final Exam 100% Correct Answers

1  In a state that has a comparative negligence statute, a jury determined that the plaintiff has sustained damages of $50,000 and that the percentages of fault are plaintiff 40 percent negligent, defendant 60 percent negligent. What would be the plaintiff’s award of damages in this case?

Check your essay before you submit. See exactly what your professor sees.

See your AI and plagiarism results before your instructor does.Get the exact same report your professor uses. Trusted by 50,000+ students worldwide.

Get Plagiarism Report Humanize My Essay

2 Ron is walking down the sidewalk not paying attention to where he is going. He runs into Ruby Jewell who is carrying a large sack of groceries. The groceries spill onto the sidewalk. Two blocks away Bud slips on an apple, which had rolled down the sidewalk, and falls onto the street as a result. Jim, driving his pickup truck prudently down the street, swerves to avoid Bud. As a result, Jim hits a car driven by Nadine Culpepper. In the accident, Nadine’s antique flower vase, in which she was carrying flowers to her sick grandmother, is completely shattered. In Nadine’s suit against Ron for negligence, which is the weakest element of her case?

3) A state statute requires that ski areas be maintained and operated in a reasonably safe manner and prescribes methods by which skiers must be warned about the presence of equipment and vehicles on slopes and trails. If a ski operator violates the statute and a skier is injured, which legal doctrine will be of primary benefit to the skier who sues for damages?

While shopping with her mother in Arnold’s Super Market, eight-year-old Janet was allowed to roam around freely. Without her mother’s knowledge, Janet opened a jar of jelly and spilled the contents on the floor. Two hours later while intently watching a good-looking butcher, a shopper named Bernadette slipped on the jelly and broke her leg. Bernadette sued the super market. Most likely, Arnold’s is

Products, Inc., manufactures a cleaning solution. It does not intend that little children drink the product, but the company does not include warnings to that effect on the label and it does not market the solution with a childproof cap. In determining whether the manufacturer is liable under negligence, which of the following inquiries would not be significant?

John Prater was employed by Roy Goodman as a general handyman in Goodman’s music store, particularly to work on piano cases, deliver pianos, and keep the delivery truck in repair. One evening, Goodman told Prater to take the truck home and work on the truck’s body over the weekend. On the truck were a few of Goodman’s trashcans, which Goodman had asked Peter to empty. The following morning, a Saturday, Prater loaded several of his own cans of garbage onto the truck. On his way back from the dump, Prater made a detour of a few blocks to pick up his daughter. On this detour, he had a collision with a car driven by W. M. Leuthold. Prater was later found to be negligent. Leuthold brought suit against Goodman for Prater’s negligence. This raises all issues except

When the driver of a car drives recklessly, crossing the center line in violation of the traffic laws and runs into another car, the driver is liable for

Toby and Rita Kahr were owners of 28 pieces of sterling silver that Rita’s father had given them as a wedding present 27 years previously. Each piece of silver was engraved with the letter “K.” On April 5, 1983, the Kahrs brought used clothing to Goodwill Industries and told Goodwill personnel that they wanted to make a donation of clothing. Unknown to Toby and Rita, the sterling silver, along with a wallet containing their credit cards, was included in their sacks. The Kahrs called Goodwill two hours later, when they realized what happened, and were told that the silver had been sold for $15 to Karen Markland. The Kahrs alleged that the silver had a value of $3,791. The Kahrs brought a replevin action against Goodwill and Markland to recover the silver.

Charles Collins and Bethany Guggenheim began living together in 1977. They were not married to each other. Bethany was recently divorced and had two children from her prior marriage. As part of the property settlement, she had received title to a 68-acre farm and Charles, Bethany, and the children moved there in 1979. They intended to restore the farmhouse (circa 1740). Charles and Bethany jointly became liable for and made payments on a bank mortgage loan, insurance, and property taxes. They maintained a joint checking account to pay for joint expenses as well as individual checking accounts. They jointly purchased a tractor and other equipment—Charles paid two-thirds of the cost, and Bethany one-third. Charles also invested $8,000 of his money in additional equipment and improvements for the farm. For several years they jointly operated a small business that made no profit. Despite Charles’s contributions, the title to the farm remained at all times with Bethany. The parties experienced personal difficulties, and when they could not reconcile their differences, they permanently separated in 1986. During their cohabitation period, Charles contributed approximately $55,000 and Bethany $44,500 to the farm. Charles filed suit seeking the recognition of his rights in the property. Which statement is true?

In which of the following situations has a mutual benefit bailment been created?

Which of the following properties would not be properly classified as a fixture?

The Adams own property that lies at the end of the runway of the municipal airport. The city has informed the Adams that they must keep their trees shorter than 30 feet high and has compensated them for this. This requirement is a(n)

The Yorks, plaintiffs, participated in an in vitro fertilization program at the defendant’s clinic. Five of the six eggs fertilized at the clinic were transferred to Mrs. York’s uterus, although she was unable to carry any of the prezygotes to term. After the Yorks moved to California, they requested that the sixth prezygote be transferred to an institution in California. The defendant refused. Which of the following statements is true?