Q&A Hero

Q: Which of the following is most likely to involve both defamation liability and liability for putting a person in a false light? A. Saying that a philosopher favors Plato's philosophy over Aristotle's, when in fact the reverse is true. B. Falsely saying that an anti-abortion activist favors a candidate that is conservative and is anti-abortion. C. Falsely saying that an anti-abortion activist favors giving parents a right of infanticide for all children less than one year old. D. Signing a conservative Christian clergyman's name to a petition advocating greater sexual freedom for homosexuals which the clergyman supports the petition in private.

Q: Most defamation cases brought by public official or public figure plaintiffs are won by the defendant, because the plaintiff was unable to prove: A. damages due to defamation. B. actual malice. C. defendant made the statements. D. the actual statements were untrue.

Q: In which of the following cases is it most likely that a plaintiff will only have to prove negligence on the defendant's part to recover for defamation? A. Statements that a U.S. Senator had someone killed while in office. B. Statements that Madonna had someone killed. C. A statement that you or I murdered an innocent person during a robbery. D. A credit report on a construction contractor.

Q: Which of the following can recover damages for proven actual injury, but not presumed or punitive damages, by proving only fault? A. A public official plaintiff involved in a subject of public concern B. A public figure plaintiff involved in a subject of private concern C. A private figure plaintiff involved in a subject of public concern D. A private figure plaintiff involved in a subject of private concern

Q: "Books are Us" (BU), a bookstore, is being sued for defamation after it sold a book containing false, defamatory statements about the plaintiff. What is BU's best defense to this lawsuit? A. BU is not the publisher of the book. B. BU did not intend to harm the plaintiff. C. BU had no knowledge of the contents of the book. D. BU did not violate any criminal law or regulation in selling the book.

Q: Dave tells Dora that Phil, a financial advisor, has been stealing money from his clients. Dora then repeats Dave's statement to Tom, telling Tom that the information comes from Dave. All these statements are oral, defamatory, and false. Phil sues Dave and Dora for defamation. Which of the following is true? (Don't consider defenses and privileges). A. Phil can recover against Dave and Dora without proving special damages. B. Because Dora only repeated Dave's statement and identified Dave as its author, she can't be liable to Phil. C. Because Dave only communicated his statement to Dora, and not to an appreciable number of people, he can't be liable to Phil. D. Phil must prove special damages in order to recover against Dave and Dora.

Q: A(n) ______ shields the author of a defamatory statement regardless of his/her knowledge, motive, or intent. A. demurrer B. transferred intent C. intentional tort D. absolute privilege

Q: Which of the following is an example of the privilege of statements made to protect or further the legitimate interests of another? A. Employment reference B. Intracorporate communications C. Accurate media reports D. Opinion polls

Q: The difference between a public figure and a private one regarding defamation cases is that: A. only the public figure can file a case. B. the private figure generally loses such cases. C. the public figure has to prove "actual malice." D. the private figure does not enjoy conditional privileges.

Q: An essential element of the tort is that the alleged defamatory statement must be "of and concerning" the plaintiff. Why? A. It is extremely difficult to prove. B. It places a burden on the defendant. C. It aims to protect reputation. D. It concerns public figures.

Q: Humorous or satirical accounts ordinarily are not considered to be defamation unless: A. a reasonable reader believes them to be real events. B. they are political in nature. C. the plaintiff can prove that they are about him/her. D. they expressly state so.

Q: Adam published his personal opinion about the current condition of politics stating, "Though the government is unable to fulfill the demands of the public, they demand votes; they really are beggars on streets." Can politicians sue him for defamation under tort? A. No, because as a general rule the material in a newspaper is totally exempted. B. Yes, because defamation in a newspaper is always a tort. C. Yes, because Adam wrote even though he did not have authority. D. No, because statements of pure opinion do not amount to defamation.

Q: In general, liability for defamation requires: A. widespread communication of the defamatory statement. B. communication of the defamatory statement from the plaintiff herself. C. publication of the defamatory statement. D. the identification of the source of the defamatory statement.

Q: The common law has, traditionally, allowed plaintiffs to recover for libel without proof of _____. A. punitive damages B. criminal damages C. liquidated damages D. actual damages

Q: Store owners' "conditional privilege" defense against intentional tort claims brought by detained shoplifting suspects, recognized by most states, usually: A. requires that the store owner act with police consent. B. requires that the store owner act with written consent of suspects. C. requires that the store owner act on evidence against suspect. D. requires that the store owner act with reasonable cause.

Q: Jack was an employee of ABC Corp. Harry, the president of ABC, had reasonable grounds to believe that Jack had stolen money from the corporation. ABC fired Jack. One month later, Jack applied for employment at DEF Corp. The vice president for Human Relations at DEF contacted Harry and asked about Jack's performance at ABC. Harry responded, "I believe that Jack stole money while working here". DEF declined to hire Jack. Jack later discovered what Harry had said, and is now suing Harry for defamation. What is the likely outcome of this case? A. Jack will win because Harry's statement harmed him. B. Jack will win because Harry did not have absolute proof that Jack had stolen money. C. Harry will win because he had a conditional privilege to make that statement. D. Harry will win because he had an absolute privilege to comment on a former employee's performance.

Q: Which of the following is slander rather than libel? A. A defamatory statue B. An oral defamatory statement C. A defamatory magazine article D. A defamatory TV broadcast

Q: Libel is distinct from slander, in that, libel: A. involves views on public figures. B. involves only content in print. C. involves only content on the Internet. D. is more permanent in nature.

Q: The necessary intent for assault is the same as that required for battery, which is to cause: A. loss of reputation B. offensive contact C. conversion of one's property D. contractual breach

Q: In an assault case, it is irrelevant: A. whether the threatened contact actually occurs. B. whether there is any intent or not. C. whether there is an apprehension of harmful contact. D. whether there is any reasonable apprehension of imminent battery.

Q: What tort defined in the Restatement (Second) of Torts requires behavior that is "so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency"? A. Battery B. Assault C. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress D. Conversion of Property

Q: Which of the following characterizes false imprisonment? A. Unintentional confinement of a person with consent B. Partial confinement of a person by blocking an exit, when several exist C. Intentional confinement of a person with consent D. Unfounded assertion of legal authority to detain a person

Q: Davis throws a dagger at Smith, intending to kill Smith. However, the dagger misses Smith and strikes the hat on Potter's head. The dagger does not make contact with Potter's body. Unharmed but finding the whole thing offensive, Potter sues Davis for battery. Which of the following is most true? A. Davis is not liable because he did not intend to make contact with Potter. B. Davis is liable to Potter for negligence. C. Davis is not liable because Potter did not suffer any physical harm. D. Davis is liable to Potter for battery.

Q: _____ is the failure to use reasonable care, with harm to another party occurring as a result. A. Assault B. Recklessness C. Negligence D. Liability

Q: What is the standard of proof that the plaintiff must satisfy in a tort case? A. Preponderance of the evidence B. Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt C. Benefit of assumption D. Burden of proof

Q: What type of damages is awarded to an injured party in a tort case to cover damages for the harm that the injured party suffered? A. Compensatory Damages B. Punitive Damages C. Criminal Fines D. Liquidated Damages

Q: _____ are intended to punish flagrant wrongdoers and to deter them. A. Compensatory damages B. Punitive damages C. Liquidated damages D. Tort damages

Q: Melissa hurls a rock with the intention to hit Dave, with whom she has just fought. The rock hits Stacey, instead, who is sitting next to Dave. Melissa is liable for battery under the clause of: A. conversion. B. private nuisance. C. actual malice. D. transferred intent.

Q: _____ is defined as the desire to cause certain consequences or the substantial certainty that those consequences will result from one's behavior. A. Intent B. Negligence C. Liability D. Battery

Q: Sounds that reverberate across the plaintiff's land are more likely to be classed as a nuisance than as a trespass to land.

Q: In order to be liable for conversion, the defendant must know that the property rightfully belongs to someone else.

Q: Nuisance involves the invasion of another's property.

Q: In order to prove actual malice in a defamation claim, the plaintiff must show that the defendant had knowledge of the falsity of the statement.

Q: There is no tort liability for fraud or deceit where the defendant did not actively make a false statement, but instead merely failed to disclose something.

Q: If one individual opens the mail of another without permission to do so, then the injured party can sue under the tort law theory of invasion of privacy.

Q: If one individual signed another's name to a petition for a political and social issue that the person had deep moral objections to, then that injured party could sue under the theory of invasion of privacy. TRUE Publicity that places a person in a false light in the public eye can be an invasion of privacy. An example would be if someone were to sign one person's name to a public petition for a cause that deeply offended and hurt the victim.

Q: The tort of malicious prosecution affords a remedy when the defendant mounted a wrongful and unjustifiable civil suit against the plaintiff.

Q: In the case of false imprisonment, the plaintiff must be under confinement for a long time. FALSE

Q: Television and radio broadcasts usually are classified as slander rather than as libel because they involve spoken words rather than written ones.

Q: Generally speaking, statements made during judicial proceedings are absolutely privileged and, therefore, shield against defamation liability.

Q: Defamation liability requires publication of the defamatory statement to an appreciable number of people.

Q: Public figure Pam sues a newspaper for defamation based on statements regarding her stand on a public issue. Pam must prove the newspaper's "actual malice" in order to recover any damage.

Q: A valid defense for battery is the free and intelligent consent given.

Q: If one party threatens to commit battery on another individual tomorrow, then this is an assault.

Q: For a battery to exist, the victim must be aware of a harmful or offensive contact at the time that contact occurs.

Q: A tort is a civil wrong which is also the same as breach of contract.

Q: With a tort the government, either the State or Federal government, prosecutes an individual for a harm to society.

Q: Under the principle of "Respondeat Superior," an employer is not liable for torts committed by employees.

Q: Punitive damages are not meant to compensate victims for their injuries.

Q: Owners of commercial property enjoy greater privacy expectations in their property for Fourth Amendment purposes than do owners of residential property.

Q: Officers may conduct a warrantless search of an individual at the time of an arrest.

Q: During a Terry Stop' officers may not conduct a pat down search of an individual without a warrant.

Q: The standard of proof in a tort case is the preponderance of the evidence.

Q: The Equal Protection Clause prevents states and the federal government from enacting criminal laws that discriminate against different classes of individuals.

Q: Voluntary intoxication usually serves as a complete defense to criminal liability.

Q: In the United States a defendant in a criminal trial is presumed innocent.

Q: At a preliminary hearing in a felony case, the government must prove its case by the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard.

Q: The language of the Bill of Rights only refers to actions of the federal government so the protections of the Bill of Rights do not apply to state government action.

Q: Crimes are private wrongs.

Q: Obscene noncommercial expressions receive no First Amendment protection.

Q: The Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and unusual punishments.

Q: When a judge's sentencing decision is challenged on appeal, the governing standard will be one of reasonableness.

Q: The U.S. Constitution allows ex post facto criminal laws.

Q: Special deterrence results when punishment of a wrongdoer deters other persons from committing similar offenses.

Q: When Congress created the U.S. Sentencing Commission and charged it with creating Sentencing Guidelines, Congress sought (among other things) to decrease the discretion of judges in making sentencing decisions.

Q: Police detective Brenda Judd had a hunch that Beats, Inc., a retail seller of stereo equipment and related supplies, was involved in a drug-smuggling operation. In order to acquire evidence confirming her hunch, Judd posed as an ordinary consumer when she entered the Beats store. She slipped out of the "public" part of the store and proceeded down a hall to an office whose closed door was marked "Private. No Entry without Authorization from Manager." She entered the office which was unoccupied, looked through files, and located documentary evidence indicating that Beats was indeed involved in an illegal operation. The evidence obtained by Judd furnished the primary basis for drug-smuggling and drug-dealing charges that are now pending against Beats. Beats has filed a pretrial motion asking the court to suppress the evidence obtained by Judd in her search of the office. Should the evidence be suppressed? Why or why not?

Q: Since the exclusionary rule has often resulted in suppression of convincing evidence of crime, it has generated controversy. How has the Supreme Court dealt with this?

Q: Nigel is the sole proprietor of a construction contracting business. As part of an investigation into bid-rigging allegations, a grand jury issued a subpoena directing Nigel to turn over various records relating to his sole proprietorship. Nigel had voluntarily prepared the subpoenaed records. The government had long known that these records probably existed, but of course did not know of their contents. Nigel resisted the subpoena on Fifth Amendment grounds, arguing that being forced to comply would violate his privilege against self-incrimination. Should Nigel be required to comply with the subpoena? Why or why not?

Q: Sal Conelli is the president and sole stockholder of Salco, Inc., a corporation engaged in the wholesale food supply business. Conelli has custody of Salco's business records. A grand jury investigating possible criminal violations of health codes applicable to food products has served a subpoena demanding that certain Salco business records be made available. Conelli plans to resist the subpoena by arguing that compelling the production of the records would violate both his and Salco's Fifth Amendment privileges against self-incrimination. Should Conelli succeed with this argument? Explain your reasoning.

Q: Leviathan Corp. has filed a civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) lawsuit against NBS Bros., an accounting firm. NBS has asked the court to dismiss the case for two reasons: first, Leviathan did not allege, and cannot prove, that NBS is connected in any way with organized crime, as that term is customarily used; and second, Leviathan did not allege, and cannot prove, that NBS was criminally convicted of a predicate offense. Should NBS succeed with these arguments? Explain your reasoning.

Q: Agreements under which corporations avoid formal criminal charges and trials in return for their agreement to pay monetary penalties and submit to outside monitoring of their activities are called: A. non-prosecution agreements. B. plea agreements. C. deferred guaranty agreements. D. deferred prosecution agreements.

Q: Kathy was accused of securities fraud. During the government investigation, she destroyed relevant documents. Under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Kathy may: A. be civilly but not criminally liable for the destruction of documents. B. face fines but not prison for the destruction of documents. C. face fines and/or a maximum of 20 years in prison. D. be considered a "whistleblower."

Q: Which of the following is a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002? A. It imposed a maximum of 15 years of imprisonment as punishment for the destruction of documents. B. It decreased the maximum term of imprisonment for mail fraud and wire fraud to 15 years. C. It provided legal protection for corporate employees who act as whistleblowers. D. It shortened the statute of limitations period within which certain securities fraud cases may be filed.

Q: The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act's (RICO's) most controversial sections allow: A. federal prosecutors to seek pretrial orders freezing a defendant's assets. B. the government to seek injunctions against future racketeering activities. C. private individuals to recover treble damages for a statutory violation. D. government intervention in white-collar crimes.

Q: Which of the following characterizes the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA)? A. It is a statute enacted by a state legislature. B. It imposes only civil liabilities in fraud cases. C. It imposes only criminal liabilities in fraud cases. D. It imposes liabilities in cases concerning interstate commerce.

Q: Average Corp. was convicted of violating the federal mail fraud statute due to the activities of some of its employees, who had used the U.S. mail to perpetrate a fraudulent scheme designed to advance the otherwise legitimate business interests of Average. Average has appealed, arguing that its conviction should be set aside because the employees in question were relatively minor officials of the company and were acting without the knowledge or consent of any high-level corporate officer. In addition, Average argues that the involved employees were acting in violation of a longstanding and well-known Average policy against fraudulent schemes. Should Average's conviction be set aside? A. Yes, because Average could not have had the necessary mens rea. B. No, because the involved employees were acting within the scope of their employment and for the benefit of Average. C. No, because nothing in the facts indicates that Average should qualify for the protection of the due diligence defense recognized by most courts. D. Yes, because high-level corporate officers must be involved and they were not involved. Here in order for criminal intent to be imputed to the corporation.

Q: Strict liability offenses: A. dispense with the requirement of proof of any criminal intent on the part of the defendant. B. are so classified because the punishments imposed on violators are especially harsh in comparison to the punishments for other criminal offenses. C. impose liability on a defendant for the act of another party. D. are commonly criticized on the ground that a person may not be convicted of such an offense without being shown to have committed a wrongful act.

Q: The Double Jeopardy Clause: A. establishes that a person cannot be prosecuted by the state for a state crime after being acquitted of a federal crime, if the two alleged crimes involved essentially the same facts. B. protects criminal defendants from having to undergo more than one prosecution by the same sovereign for the same criminal offense. C. establishes that a single criminal act with multiple victims cannot result in more than one criminal prosecution. D. bars a private plaintiff from pursuing a civil case against the defendant who was criminally prosecuted for the same alleged conduct.

Q: "White-collar crime" is the term used to describe a wide variety of offenses committed by: A. the average working class. B. poor Americans. C. businesspersons. D. juveniles.

Q: The expansion of corporate criminal liability in imputing the criminal intent of employees to the corporation falls under the scope of: A. mens rea. B. presumption of innocence. C. double jeopardy. D. respondeat superior.