Law School Multiple Choice

Part 2: 10 Multiple Choice Questions Cut and past the Answers into your Final submission with your essay. Answers 1.  2.  3.  4.  5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.   1. Steve was crossing a street in a crosswalk when Barbara walking just ahead of him was hit by a truck.  Steve, who had jumped out of the way of the truck, administered CPR to Barbara, who was a stranger.  Barbara bled profusely, and Steve was covered in blood.  Barbara died in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.  Steve became very depressed immediately after the incident and developed physical symptoms as a result of his emotional distress. The Steve has brought an action against the driver of the truck for negligent infliction of emotional distress.  What is the strongest argument for the defense?  A.  Steve did not see the driver hit Barbara. B.  Steve was acting as a Good Samaritan so NIED does not apply. C.  Steve was covered in Barbara’s blood and developed physical symptoms as a result of this not witnessing the accident. D. Steve was not a family member.    2. For negligent infliction of emotional distress and bystander recovery theory, which of the following is not an essential element of the plaintiff’s burden of proof?  A. The plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress. B. The plaintiff’s mental distress resulted from a sensory and contemporaneous observance of the accident. C. The plaintiff suffered demonstrable physical injury from the accident. D. A close relative is killed or injured by the defendant.   3. The following is NOT an element to a NIED action:  A. The plaintiff must be married to the victim. B. Emotional distress with a physical manifestation. C. Contemporaneous observance of the accident. D. A close relative is killed or injured by the defendant. 4. After her husband died in a hospital, a widow directed the hospital to send her husband’s body to a funeral home for burial.  The hospital negligently misidentified the husband’s body and sent it to be cremated.  When she was informed of the hospital’s mistake, the widow suffered serious emotional distress.  She has sued the hospital. Is the hospital likely to be held liable to the widow for NIED? A. No, because the widow did not witness the cremation. B. No, because the widow was never in any danger of bodily harm. C. No, because the widow in no longer a close family member. D. No, because the negligent handling of the husband’s body is not likely to cause serious emotional distress.   5. Mark go a shiny new bicycle from Fabulous Bikes. When Mark was riding the bicycle the frame of the bicycle broke and Mark suffered injuries to his leg. Mark’s sister Marcia, saw the accident take place. Marcia becomes distraught to such an extent that she seeks medical care, for nightmares, and a nerves tick.   Will Marcia prevail in a claim of NIED against Fabulous Bikes.   A. Yes, because Marcia is Mark’s sister.   B. Yes, because Marcia was a witness to the accident.   C. Yes, because Marcia was so distraught that he sought medical care.   D. Yes, because Marcia has experienced severe physical manifestations of emotional distress.   E. All of the Above    6. Mary, a 68-year-old widow, lived with her nephew Eric because of her bad hip. Mary hired an electrician to make some wiring repairs to her home and the electrician accidentally started a fire that destroyed her house and killed Eric. Mary got out of the house and was not injured but watched in horror as Eric burned alive. It was emotionally devastating for Mary, can she recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress? A. Yes, because the electrician was the cause of her emotional distress through his outrageous conduct of starting the fire. B. Yes, because Eric was living with her at the time. C. No, because her situation does not meet all the elements necessary to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress. D. No, because she assumed the risk by having someone do electrical work in her home.   7. What Dose a Plaintiff Need to Prove to Sue for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress As a Bystander to an Automobile Accident? A. The Impact Rule: The defendant’s actions caused some type of impact or physical contact to the Plaintiff. B. The Zone of Danger Rule: Requires the plaintiff to be in close enough proximity to the defendant’s negligent actions that the plaintiff was at risk of physical harm. C. Foreseeability Rule: the defendant to have been able to reasonably predict that her or his actions could cause negative consequences for the plaintiff. D. Emotional Distress Rule: The plaintiff suffered serious emotional distress, greater than that of a disinterested bystander.    8. To prove negligent infliction of emotional distress as a bystander, a plaintiff must show? A. The plaintiff is related to the victim by marriage. B. The plaintiff was present at the scene of the injury when it occurred and but does not need to be aware that the victim was being injured. C. As a result of the injury, the victim suffered severe emotional distress. D. All of the above. E. None of the above.   9. Who is not a “close relative” under NIED? A. The victim’s spouse. B. The victim’s grandparents. C. The victim’s unmarried cohabitant of 7 years. D. The victim’s parents.    10. Which is not a “witness” to an accident for NIED? A. Present at the scene of the injury-producing event at the time it occurred. B. Aware of the accident but was not immediately aware it was causing injury to a family member. C. Aware that the event was causing injury to the victim. D. Aware at the time of the accident, through some sensory means, that his or her relative was being injured.