Insurance Payments Always Reduce Damages
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
20496_loaves_prop_cart · TORTS · Choice ADenied, because the payment from Lydia’s insurer was not made after any court decided that Daniel was liable.
Why it's attractive
The student sees the right result, denial, and accepts the first plausible reason attached to it. The breaker is that judicial determination is not the source-identity switch.
Why it's wrong
The choice gives the right outcome but rests on judicial determination, not payment source.
Spot it next time
Ask: court determination or payment source?
20496_loaves_prop_cart · TORTS · Choice BGranted, because Daniel is entitled to partial indemnity.
Why it's attractive
The student recognizes partial indemnity as a serious tort-allocation phrase. The breaker is that indemnity belongs to common-liability actors, not plaintiff-side insurance.
Why it's wrong
The choice imports partial indemnity from the joint-tortfeasor allocation frame.
Spot it next time
Reserve indemnity/contribution for common-liability actors.
20496_loaves_prop_cart · TORTS · Choice DGranted, because Lydia should not be allowed to recover twice for the same medical expenses.
Why it's attractive
The student wants to prevent a double recovery and follows common-sense fairness. The breaker is the collateral-source Gold Key: plaintiff-side insurance does not reduce the tortfeasor's judgment.
Why it's wrong
The choice uses double-recovery fairness language that the collateral-source rule defeats.
Spot it next time
Plaintiff-side insurance is collateral.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →