By meeting the burden of proof, the plaintiff has
A) shifted to defendant the burden to rebut plaintiff's case
B) neutralized any claim for indemnification
C) established the defendant's liability beyond a reasonable doubt
D) shown why the res ipsa loquitur doctrine does not apply
Q. #2The easiest way to establish the gross negligence of a defendant is for plaintiff to
A) prove that defendant engaged in willful, wanton and reckless conduct
B) establish a claim for indemnification
C) show that the defendant failed to use great care
D) rebut the presumption of guilt
Q. #3By making out a prima facie case, plaintiff has
A) shown that defendant is liable beyond a reasonable doubt
B) proven the presumption of liability
C) relied on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur
D) established defendant's liability by a preponderance of the evidence
Q. #4The State of New Vermont has enacted a cap on the amount of damages a plaintiff can recover for
a death arising due to negligence. The head of a family dies in a car accident that occurred only
because of the negligence of the defendant. The children of the family sue for damages due to the loss
of affection and support from the deceased head of the family. The best strategy for the children to use
to avoid the limitation of the cap is to
A) claim that the cap applies for each child's claim and not for all the children
B) ask the court for indemnification
C) seek joint and several liability
D) use the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur
Q. #5A strong wind gust blows through the doors to a warehouse-style store. It knocks over paint cans
kept on an upper level shelf, one of which hits the plaintiff. The store's best argument for escaping
liability would be to
A) argue that this was not negligence per se
B) use the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur
C) show that this was an unavoidable accident
D) claim that this was an Act of God
Q. #6A river overflows its banks, flooding the basement of a nearby house. To avoid liability, the
carrier of the flood insurance policy for the house most likely will claim that since the river had never
before overflown its banks, this involved
A) indemnification B) an unavoidable accident
C) the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur D) an Act of God
Q. #7Whether a cause of action exists for negligence per se will involve
A) the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur B) a question of fact
C) a question of law D) B and C only
Quick Reply
