Question

BUSINESS LAW 1

5 . The doctrine of market share liability may be used :

a) where the plaintiff cannot prove which one of multiple defendants

caused his harm

b) where multiple plaintiffs sue the same defendant for the same harm

c) where a defendant’s tortious conduct causes harm to the plaintiff’s

business in the form of lost or decreased market share

d) as a defense to a products liability lawsuit ____

6 . Abby tells Bob that she will sell him her rare coin collection for $1000. Bob tells

Abby that he does not think the collection is worth that much, but would buy it

for $800. Which of the following is NOT true?

a) Bob has made a counteroffer, but if Abby does not accept, Bob can stil l buy the

collection for $1000

b) Bob has rejected Abby’s offer and can no longer accept it

c) Bob has made a counteroffer, which Abby can accept or reject

d) Abby and Bob have not reached a meeting of the minds ____

7 . Gift or donative promises generally are:

a) voidable

b) unenforceable

c) disfavored in the law

d) enforceable only if in writing ____

8 . Suppose that a plaintiff suffers total damages of $100,000 in a car acciden t

for which he was 70% at fault and the defendant was 30% at fault. Unde r

the pure comparative negligence rule, the plaintiff would recover:

a) $100,000

b) $30,000

c) $0

d) $70,000 ____

Answer 1

5. a) where the plaintiff cannot prove which one of multiple defendants caused his harm

The doctrine of Market share liability allows a plaintiff to establish a case against multiple defendants ie product manufacturers for harm caused by a product, even when the plaintiff does not know or cannot prove from which defendant the product actually originated.

6. b) Bob has rejected Abby’s offer and can no longer accept it

Bob and Abby are in the process of negotiation. Bob has quoted a price lower than that offered by Abby. Therefore, Bob has not yet rejected Abby's offer and is in the process of negotiation by making a counteroffer. Abby may choose to accept or reject the counteroffer. Also, as of now, Bob and Abby have not reached a meeting of the minds or a mutual agreement.

7. b) unenforceable

Gifts or Donative promises are generally unenforceable as there is no consideration involved.

8. b) $30,000

Pure comparative negligence rule allows a plaintiff to recover the amount for which the defendant was at fault.

In this case, the defendant was 30% at fault. So, the plaintiff can recover 30% of the total damages.

30% of the total damages = 30% of 100,000 = $ 30,000