Phillip was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street ...

[Mr.Thesaxman]

Phillip was waiting for a bus at a bus stop. Across the street and down the block, a mechanic negligently overinflated a tire he was intending to put onto Marsha's pickup truck. The exploding tire injured Marsha and frightened a neighborhood dog, which ran down the street and knocked Phillip down, injuring his knee. Phillip sued the mechanic. In applying the Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co decision to this case, Phillip would
 A) win because the mechanic was negligent in overinflating the tire, which led to Phillip's injury.
 B) win based on negligence per se.
 C) lose because the court would apply the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
 D) lose because, although the mechanic's conduct was negligent toward Marsha, it was not a wrong in relation to Phillip, who was far away. The mechanic could not have foreseen injury to Phillip and therefore had no duty to him.

Question 2

Kyle was eating clam chowder soup in a restaurant when a very small piece of bone lodged in his throat. Fortunately, he was able to remove the bone with his fingers. However, he was upset by the incident and sued the restaurant for negligence. What is the most likely result in this case?
 A) Kyle will not collect any damages since he did not sustain any damages.
 B) Kyle will collect damages because the restaurant committed negligence per se.
 C) Kyle will collect damages if he proves it was possible to prevent tiny fish bones from being present in clam chowder.
 D) Kyle will collect damages, as res ipsa loquitur applies.

[Chocorrol77]

Answer to Question 1

D

Answer to Question 2

A

[Mr.Thesaxman]

Excellent

[ebonylittles]

Gracias!