Please give me the letter answers 25. The reasonable person standard in negligen
ID: 381921 • Letter: P
Question
Please give me the letter answers
25. The reasonable person standard in negligence
(a) creates an incentive for all injurers to meet that standard to avoid liability for accidents.
(b) increases the activity level of all injurers compared to strict liability.
(c) reduces the care level of individuals whose costs of care are slightly above average compared to strict liability.
(d) is equivalent to strict liability for some persons whose costs of care are much higher than average.
(e) increases the activity level of injurers compared to an individualized negligence standard.
26. Assuming all parties have identical costs of care, negligence and strict liability lead to the same number of accidents if
(a) optimal victim care is zero and activity level changes are inefficient.
(b) optimal injurer care is zero and activity level changes are efficient.
(c) the efficient outcome requires the injurer to alter its activity level.
(d) a defense of contributory negligence is added to both liability rules.
(e) victims can alter their activity levels at lower costs than injurers can alter their activity levels..
27. The statement that best describes the difference between protecting entitlements by property rights or by liability rules is:
(a) the harm is greater from violating an entitlement protected by a property right than one protected by a liability rule.
(b) both apply to high transaction cost settings but the remedy under a property right is an injunction while the remedy under a liability rule is damages.
(c) the cost of enforcing a property right exceeds the cost of enforcing a liability rule.
(d) property rights are good against all trespassers while liability rules apply only to parties unwilling to compensate victims in voluntary transactions.
(e) a property right approach assumes that a voluntary transaction is economical whereas a liability rule approach assumes that transactions costs prevent a voluntary transaction.
28. Assume B engaged in an ultrahazardous activity such as blasting is strictly liable for A’s damages. A’s total damages are $150 of which $50 would have occurred even if B had not been blasting. If B is strictly liable for $150 instead of $100 in damages, then
(a) A will take too little care relative to due care.
(b) B may not engage in blasting even though it is efficient to do so.
(c) A will have no incentive to alter its activity level which it would do if it only recovered $100.
(d) B may increase its level of blasting to compensate for the extra $50 damages it must pay.
(e) B will take care in excess of the due care level.
29. The economic rationale for the defense that the defendant in a product liability lawsuit has complied with the customary level of care of the industry is
(a) the accident victim has implicitly paid for that level of care and hence to award him damages for the injurer’s failure to take additional care would overcompensate him.
(b) it reduces the costs to courts of determining the injurer’s level of care.
(c) if the accident victim desired a different level of care, he would have negotiated for it.
(d) the customary level of care approximates due care for accidents arising out of a contract.
(e) all of the above.
30. The economic argument for holding a manufacturer vicariously liable for the intentional torts of its customers is the following:
(a) the manufacturer is in a better position to monitor its customers actions than the victim of the tort.
(b) customers typically lack the wealth to pay for the damages they cause whereas manufacturers have deep pockets.
(c) enforcement resources are saved because it is cheaper to sue one manufacturer than many customers.
(d) the manufacturer will include its expected liability cost in the price of the product so customers, in effect, pay for their torts.
(e) customers are risk averse but firms tend to be risk neutral so that the cost of risk is eliminated by holding the manufacturer liable.
31. The statement that best describes the difference between negligence and comparative negligence is the following:
(a) Since both rules create incentives for injurers and victims to take due care, the principal difference between the two relates to distribution effects and administrative costs when both parties are negligent.
(b) Comparative negligence leads to a lower level of victim care than negligence because in the former a victim still recovers part of its damages even if he is contributorily negligence.
(c) Comparative negligence leads the parties to share more equally the costs of avoiding accidents which is beneficial for risk averse individuals.
(d) Negligence involves greater administrative costs than comparative negligence because in the former the court must decide both care levels and the amount of damages whereas in the latter it only has to apportion damages between the parties.
(e) Negligence is concerned with questions of economic efficiency while comparative negligence is concerned with distribution issues.
Explanation / Answer
A 25- C IT RESULTSIN SLIGHTLY NEGLIENCE BUT NO SERIOUS DAMAGE DONE WHICH CANNOT BE RATIFIED EX- SUPPOSE IF BRAKRES OF CAR FAILS THEN WE WILL DRIVE IN LOW GEAR TO MINIMISE AN UNWANTED EVENT TO HAPEN IF UNFORTUNATELY DONE THEN DAMAGES WILL BE MINIMAL.
A-26- C THAT TO REDUCE THE ACTIVITY TO MINIMISE LOSS AS IN ABOVE CASE A PERSON MAY SPEED UP HIS CAR RESULTING IN SERIOUS DAMAGE HAPPEN IN CASE OF AN ACCIDENT.
A-27C AS IF COST EXCEEDS IT WON'T BE REWARDING TO PROTECTTHE PROPERTY RIGHTS. FOR EX- IF COMPANY HAS ASSETS OF $100000 AND LIABLITIES OF 80000 THEN ONLY IT WILL USE PROPERTY RIGHTS OR VICE VERSA.
A-28 D- AS TOTAL LIABLITY OF B IS FIXED HE MAY TRY TO EARN MORE THAN $150 TO COVER THE COST HE MUST INCURR TO COMPENSATE A.
A-29-D AS THE DEFENDENT HAS TRY HIS BEST TO SATISFY OR COMPENSATE VICITIMS AS PER BEST OF HIS ABILITIES AND INDUSTRIAL RULES AND REGULATIONS. FOR EX- IN CASE OF A FIRE BROKE OUT IN AN PLANT. IF PLANT OWNER DOES ALL HE CAN TO TAKE CARE OF VICTIMS WHO ARE INJURJED. COMPENSATE ALL IN TERMS OF LOSSES INCURRED BY THEM LIKE DEATH.OR ANY TYPE OF DAMAGE. AFTER DOING DUE DILIENCE PROCESS AS PER INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS IF SUED CAN PROVE THAT EVENT HAPPENNING IS AN ACCIDENT NOT ANY NEGLIENECY OF OWNERS . SO THEY TRY THEIR BEST TO SATISFY THE AFFECTED FAMILIES.
A-30 -A IF MANUFACTURER IS AWARE OF HIS PRODUCTION PROCESS ITS HIS LIABILTY TO REPAIR ANY FAULT ARISING IN PRODUCTION. FOR EX- IF BRAKING SYSTEM OF A CAR IS FAULTY ITS LIABILTY OF MANUFACTURER TO RECALL ALL MODELS WITHTHE FAULT AND DO GENERAL CHECK UP OF AKLL PRODUCTS COMING FROM PLANT TO CONFIRM THAT NO POSSIBLE ACCIDENTS COULD HAPPEN DUE TO PRODUCTION DEFECTIF THEN ALSO HAPPENS ITS LIABILITY OF MANUFACTURER TO COMPENSATE VICTIMS AS GOOD BUSINESS PRATICE AND BRAND IMAGE
.A31-C AS IT EVENT HAPPENING NOT BY ERROR PF ONE PARTY THEN LIABILITY CANNOT BE BORNE BY A SINGLE PARTY.
EX- IF A PERSON IS DRIVING HIS BRAKE FAILS MET WITH AN ACCIDENT WITH AN DRUKEN DRIVER THEN RESPONSIBILITY OF EVENT HAPPENNING AND DAMAGES INCURRED CAN NOT BORNE BY SINGLE PARTY.THEY BOTH ARE RESPONSIBLE.