Phillip was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Marsha's pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Marsha and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Phillip down, injuring his knee. Phillip sued the mechanic. In applying the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co
decision to this case, Phillip would
A) win because the mechanic was negligent in overinflating the tire, which led to Phillip's injury.
B) win based on negligence per se.
C) lose because the court would apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
D) lose because, although the mechanic's conduct was negligent toward Marsha, it was not a wrong in relation to Phillip, who was far away. The mechanic could not have foreseen injury to Phillip and therefore had no duty to him.
D
You might also like to view...
______ occurs when two parties both try to claim a “fixed pie” of resources.
A. Distributive bargaining B. Dissemination bargaining C. Assimilative bargaining D. Integrative bargaining
Products are born, and then they grow up and become mature. In marketing, this process is known as the ________
Fill in the blanks with correct word
Today gender may be considered a BFOQ only if the requirement is essential to the job
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
Caroline is riding the elevator when she overhears two men talking about a proposed merger
It seems that Strawberry Corporation is going to acquire all the stock of Maple Co Caroline asks the two men what they are talking about, and they say that when this news becomes public, Maple Co's stock will increase dramatically in price. They tell Caroline that this is private information and that she is not to tell anyone. Caroline buys some Maple Co stock. Several months later, after the merger is announced, Caroline sells her stock for a large profit. Assuming all the information Caroline had was material, nonpublic information, which of the following best describes Caroline's situation? A) Caroline has violated no law, since she is not an insider. B) Caroline has probably violated the 1933 Securities Act. C) Caroline has violated no law, since she did not know the men she overheard. D) Caroline has violated no law, because she had already heard the main points of the information before asking about it. E) Caroline has probably violated the 1934 Securities and Exchange Act.