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 tortfeasor 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. 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 custom 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. Based on your reading of the Santiago v. First Student, Inc. case, which of the following statements is true? A The court indicated that it disbelieved the plaintiff. B One cannot prove unreasonable risk without establishing specific facts of conduct. C The nature of an accident was almost always sufficient to show unreasonableness. D Justifiable speculation is generally sufficient to establish unreasonableness. Which of the following statements regarding circumstantial evidence is not true? A Circumstantial evidence is often the most important evidence in tort cases. B Circumstantial evidence is evidence of one fact that permits an inference of another fact. C Few negligence cases involve the use of circumstantial evidence. D Circumstantial evidence can benefit both the plaintiff’s and defendant’s case Which of the following is not an accurate definition of breach of duty. A An act, the nonoccurrence of which may cause damage to another. B The defendant’s failure to meet the standard of care. C The defendant’s failure to act as a reasonable person would have acted under the same or similar circumstances. D The unreasonable conduct by the defendant. Based upon your reading of the United States v. Carroll Towing Co. case, which statement, below, regarding the ‘Risk Calculus’ Theory was not true? A The formula expressed was that a breach of duty exists if “B is less than L multiplied by P.” B The “L” in the formula referred to the injury suffered by the plaintiff. C The formula was intended to be inflexible. D Judge Hand determined that the burden of taking adequate precautions was less than the gravity of the resulting injury times the probability that the barge would break away. Which of the following statements is not true regarding safety custom? A Evidence that defendant violated customary safety precautions of the relevant community is usually sufficient to get plaintiff’s case to the jury. B A defendant who complied with all safety requirements of a statute might still be negligent. C In many courts, plaintiff has been allowed to introduce into evidence safety manuals written by private organizations to show that defendant, in failing to follow such manuals, fell below the standard of reasonable care. D A defendant who fails to comply with a safety custom established by a statute or ordinance may introduce evidence that the statute or ordinance is customarily violated by others in the community as evidence of the defendant’s reasonable conduct