Any Plaintiff Action Equals Contributory Negligence
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 1 active question. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- Torts1
Example wrong choices
18794_bethany_banner_tube · TORTS · Choice APeter was contributorily negligent in moving the wet tube.
Why it's attractive
Peter touched the tube, but the stem does not show he knew it was dangerous or acted unreasonably.
Why it's wrong
Peter touched the tube, but the stem does not show he knew it was dangerous or acted unreasonably.
18794_bethany_banner_tube · TORTS · Choice BPeter was a mere licensee and was entitled only to a warning of conditions that Mary knew were dangerous.
Why it's attractive
The stem is about riding in a vehicle, not entering Mary's land.
Why it's wrong
The stem is about riding in a vehicle, not entering Mary's land.
18794_bethany_banner_tube · TORTS · Choice DPeter assumed the risk of injury resulting from contact with the wet tube.
Why it's attractive
Peter touched a wet tube; the stem does not say he knew it carried caustic solution.
Why it's wrong
Peter touched a wet tube; the stem does not say he knew it carried caustic solution.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →