1|Page
MGMT 311 EXAM 2 NEWEST 2026 ACTUAL EXAM
COMPLETE 100 QUESTIONS AND CORRECT
DETAILED ANSWERS (VERIFIED ANSWERS)
|ALREADY GRADED A+||NEWEST EXAM!!!!
While Jessica, Ashley, and Bryan are snowboarding, they
ignore warning signs indicating that they have left the
marked trail and are entering dangerous territory. They
become lost, and a rescue effort begins. Climbing the
mountain, a snowplow accidentally cuts a nearby town's
main electrical cable. Due to the loss of her electric heat,
Ethel, an elderly woman, dies of hypothermia. The
boarders' negligence in ignoring the warning signs is:
a. The proximate cause of Ethel's death.
b. Not the cause of Ethel's death.
c. The superseding cause of Ethel's death.
d. The causation in fact, but not the proximate cause, of
Ethel's death. - ANSWER-d. The causation in fact, but not
the proximate cause, of Ethel's death.
Injury Requirement and Damages - ANSWER-To recover,
plaintiff must show legally recognizable injury
Good Samaritan Law - ANSWER-Protect individuals from
liability who aid voluntarily
,2|Page
- protect medical professional who volunteer in emergency
situations
Dram Shop Acts - ANSWER-Bar owners and bartenders
liable when intoxicated individuals cause injuries
- Sellers can be held liable if reasonable care is breeched
(Has to be foreseeable)
Superseding Cause - ANSWER-An unforeseeable,
intervening act that breaks the causal link between
defendant's act and plaintiff's injury, relieving defendant of
liability.
ex.) Just after libelous statement is published plaintiff dies
Contributory Negligence - ANSWER-Individuals must
exercise a duty of care to themselves
Chapter 7 - ANSWER-
Strict Liability - ANSWER-Regardless if duty of care is
applied if there is an extreme risk there may be
_________
,3|Page
- Plaintiff must not show how/why the product was
defective, just that it was defective when sold, and the
defect made it unreasonably dangerous to the user.
Strict Liability to Product Liability - ANSWER-Strict Liability
may apply to manufactures and sellers of harmful and
defective products.
MIND TAP QUESTION
Emily, while driving a car manufactured by Toyosan,
suffered a side impact collision from another driver. When
Toyosan's air bag deployed, it caused damage to Emily's
face and teeth as she hit her head against the steering
wheel. If Emily sued Toyosan for strict product liability, the
court would likely conclude that:
a. Emily misused the product in driving the car.
b. Emily was comparatively negligent for her own injuries.
c. Toyosan's air bag was defective because of the
consumer-expectations test.
d. Toyosan's air bag did not have a defective product
design. - ANSWER-c. Toyosan's air bag was defective
because of the consumer-expectations test.
, 4|Page
MIND TAP QUESTION
John purchases a blender from JuiceMart. A crack in the
plastic casing causes the blade to swing out of control and
nearly injure John's arm. John is shaken up by the incident
but otherwise uninjured. John's strict product liability suit
will most likely:
a. Fail, because John did not incur physical harm to self or
property.
b. Succeed, because JuiceMart was in the business of
selling that product.
c. Fail, because the blender was not in a defective
condition.
d. Succeed, because the blender was not substantially
changed from the time the product was sold to the time
the injury was sustained. - ANSWER-a. Fail becase John
did not incur physical harm to self or property
MIND TAP QUESTION
Fred sued Document Security Company, alleging he had
suffered injuries to his hands as a result of attempting to
fix a jam in one of Document Security's paper shredders.
Fred alleged the shredder was defective because it failed
to contain warnings regarding the dangers to fingers and
MGMT 311 EXAM 2 NEWEST 2026 ACTUAL EXAM
COMPLETE 100 QUESTIONS AND CORRECT
DETAILED ANSWERS (VERIFIED ANSWERS)
|ALREADY GRADED A+||NEWEST EXAM!!!!
While Jessica, Ashley, and Bryan are snowboarding, they
ignore warning signs indicating that they have left the
marked trail and are entering dangerous territory. They
become lost, and a rescue effort begins. Climbing the
mountain, a snowplow accidentally cuts a nearby town's
main electrical cable. Due to the loss of her electric heat,
Ethel, an elderly woman, dies of hypothermia. The
boarders' negligence in ignoring the warning signs is:
a. The proximate cause of Ethel's death.
b. Not the cause of Ethel's death.
c. The superseding cause of Ethel's death.
d. The causation in fact, but not the proximate cause, of
Ethel's death. - ANSWER-d. The causation in fact, but not
the proximate cause, of Ethel's death.
Injury Requirement and Damages - ANSWER-To recover,
plaintiff must show legally recognizable injury
Good Samaritan Law - ANSWER-Protect individuals from
liability who aid voluntarily
,2|Page
- protect medical professional who volunteer in emergency
situations
Dram Shop Acts - ANSWER-Bar owners and bartenders
liable when intoxicated individuals cause injuries
- Sellers can be held liable if reasonable care is breeched
(Has to be foreseeable)
Superseding Cause - ANSWER-An unforeseeable,
intervening act that breaks the causal link between
defendant's act and plaintiff's injury, relieving defendant of
liability.
ex.) Just after libelous statement is published plaintiff dies
Contributory Negligence - ANSWER-Individuals must
exercise a duty of care to themselves
Chapter 7 - ANSWER-
Strict Liability - ANSWER-Regardless if duty of care is
applied if there is an extreme risk there may be
_________
,3|Page
- Plaintiff must not show how/why the product was
defective, just that it was defective when sold, and the
defect made it unreasonably dangerous to the user.
Strict Liability to Product Liability - ANSWER-Strict Liability
may apply to manufactures and sellers of harmful and
defective products.
MIND TAP QUESTION
Emily, while driving a car manufactured by Toyosan,
suffered a side impact collision from another driver. When
Toyosan's air bag deployed, it caused damage to Emily's
face and teeth as she hit her head against the steering
wheel. If Emily sued Toyosan for strict product liability, the
court would likely conclude that:
a. Emily misused the product in driving the car.
b. Emily was comparatively negligent for her own injuries.
c. Toyosan's air bag was defective because of the
consumer-expectations test.
d. Toyosan's air bag did not have a defective product
design. - ANSWER-c. Toyosan's air bag was defective
because of the consumer-expectations test.
, 4|Page
MIND TAP QUESTION
John purchases a blender from JuiceMart. A crack in the
plastic casing causes the blade to swing out of control and
nearly injure John's arm. John is shaken up by the incident
but otherwise uninjured. John's strict product liability suit
will most likely:
a. Fail, because John did not incur physical harm to self or
property.
b. Succeed, because JuiceMart was in the business of
selling that product.
c. Fail, because the blender was not in a defective
condition.
d. Succeed, because the blender was not substantially
changed from the time the product was sold to the time
the injury was sustained. - ANSWER-a. Fail becase John
did not incur physical harm to self or property
MIND TAP QUESTION
Fred sued Document Security Company, alleging he had
suffered injuries to his hands as a result of attempting to
fix a jam in one of Document Security's paper shredders.
Fred alleged the shredder was defective because it failed
to contain warnings regarding the dangers to fingers and
