Defenses to Torts
This quiz will test your knowledge of the various defenses to torts.
Questions
Which of the following is not a defense to a tort?
- Consent
- Self-defense
- Necessity
- Statute of limitations
In the defense of consent, the defendant must show that:
- The plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly agreed to the conduct that caused the injury.
- The plaintiff was mentally incompetent at the time of the conduct.
- The defendant was acting in self-defense.
- The defendant was acting under duress or coercion.
In the defense of self-defense, the defendant must show that:
- The defendant reasonably believed that they were in imminent danger of being harmed.
- The defendant used reasonable force to defend themselves.
- The defendant was acting in defense of another person.
- All of the above.
In the defense of necessity, the defendant must show that:
- They were faced with a choice of two evils and chose the lesser evil.
- They acted to protect their own life or the life of another person.
- They acted to prevent serious harm to property.
- All of the above.
Which of the following is not a defense to a defamation claim?
- Truth
- Privilege
- Consent
- Statute of limitations
In the defense of truth, the defendant must show that:
- The statement is literally true.
- The statement is substantially true.
- The statement is true in its context.
- All of the above.
In the defense of privilege, the defendant must show that:
- The statement was made in a judicial proceeding.
- The statement was made in a legislative proceeding.
- The statement was made in an executive proceeding.
- All of the above.
Which of the following is not a defense to a negligence claim?
- Contributory negligence
- Comparative negligence
- Assumption of risk
- Statute of limitations
In the defense of contributory negligence, the defendant must show that:
- The plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable care for their own safety.
- The plaintiff's negligence was a direct and proximate cause of their injuries.
- The plaintiff's negligence was greater than the defendant's negligence.
- All of the above.
In the defense of comparative negligence, the defendant must show that:
- The plaintiff's negligence was a direct and proximate cause of their injuries.
- The plaintiff's negligence was greater than the defendant's negligence.
- The plaintiff's negligence was equal to the defendant's negligence.
- None of the above.
In the defense of assumption of risk, the defendant must show that:
- The plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly assumed the risk of injury.
- The plaintiff was aware of the risk of injury and chose to proceed anyway.
- The plaintiff's assumption of risk was reasonable.
- All of the above.
Which of the following is not a defense to a strict liability claim?
- Act of God
- Unavoidable accident
- Assumption of risk
- Statute of limitations
In the defense of act of God, the defendant must show that:
- The injury was caused by a natural event that could not have been prevented by human intervention.
- The natural event was the sole cause of the injury.
- The defendant took all reasonable steps to prevent the injury.
- All of the above.
In the defense of unavoidable accident, the defendant must show that:
- The injury was caused by an accident that could not have been prevented by human intervention.
- The accident was the sole cause of the injury.
- The defendant took all reasonable steps to prevent the accident.
- All of the above.
Which of the following is not a defense to a battery claim?
- Self-defense
- Defense of others
- Consent
- Statute of limitations