Question

Three spectators attending an Arizona Diamondbacks baseball game are hit by a flying bat and sue the Diamondbacks. The Diamondbacks would use the ____________ defense to support why they are not liable for damages.

B. assumption of risk.

A. contributory negligence.

D. proximate cause.

C. comparative negligence.

E. actual cause.

Paul filed a lawsuit for false imprisonment against Dan’s Bookstore. During a visit to Dan’s Bookstore, Dan stopped Paul as he left the store. Dan accused Paul of stealing a book from the store. After briefly looking into Paul’s shopping bag, Dan determined that Paul did not shoplift. He apologized to Paul and released him. On these facts, Dan will likely:

A. win the case, because the shopkeepers’ privilege statute gives store merchants full and unconditional immunity (protection) from such lawsuits.

B. lose the case, because Paul did not shoplift.

D. lose the case, because Dan did not have a warrant.

C. win the case, but only if a court or trier of fact concludes that Dan had reasonable cause to believe Paul may have shoplifted, detained him for a reasonable time, and in a reasonable manner.

Marcus is a bartender at a local bar. He drops a glass bottle on the floor and does not clean it up right away because the bar is so busy, but he intends to clean it up as soon as he can. Marcus, as well as the bar owner, would likely be liable for:

C. no damages because Marcus intends to clean up the glass.

D. no damages because customers assume the risk of stepping on potentially dangerous things when they go to a bar.

A. the injuries caused to anyone who cut themselves on the glass.

B. damages from a fire caused by sunlight that is magnified through shards of the broken glass left on the floor.

Answer 1

1. Three spectators attending an Arizona Diamondbacks baseball game are hit by a flying bat and sue the Diamondbacks. The Diamondbacks would use the assumption of risk defense to support why they are not liable for damages.

Assumption of risk is the legal doctrine which states that if a person knows that something can be risky, but still participates in it, then the person is taking the assumption of risk. The spectators of the game did have the idea that the game can be dangerous, but they still came to witness it. This means that the legal doctrine of assumption of risk was adhered to.

Answer: Option B – Assumption of risk

2. As per the shopkeeper’s privilege statute, the shopkeepers are given the power to detain an individual if the shopkeeper has substantial reason to back his doubt. Moreover the detention must happen till the investigation is being conducted inside or near the shop’s premises. The detention must also last a defined period of time. To put a restriction on the shopkeeper’s privilege, a condition is kept that the shopkeeper can use limited force on the suspect, just to keep him in detention, if he is trying to flee away.

In the given case, Dan can win only if a court or trier of fact concludes that Dan had reasonable cause to believe Paul may have shoplifted, detained him for a reasonable time, and in a reasonable manner.

Answer: Option C- win the case, but only if a court or trier of fact concludes that Dan had reasonable cause to believe Paul may have shoplifted, detained him for a reasonable time, and in a reasonable manner.

3. Bars do have a duty of care for its customers. By not cleaning the broken glass pieces, both Marcus and the bar owner are breaching the duty of care. If a customer gets injured by the broken glass pieces, a negligence tort claim can be filed against the bar owner as well as Marcus.

Answer: Option A - the injuries caused to anyone who cut themselves on the glass.