Torts Keyed to Dobbsback
0 of 2 questions completed
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading…
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to pass the previous Module’s quiz in order to start this quiz:
you have successfully completed the quiz.
A patient went to a dermatologist for treatment of a skin condition on his face that had resisted standard treatment. The dermatologist prescribed a new topical antibiotic cream that was recommended by her associate. She gave the patient instructions on how and when to apply the cream but did not discuss potential side effects. The patient purchased the cream at his local pharmacy and applied it as instructed. Shortly thereafter his skin turned a distinct shade of green and he felt a strong burning sensation when he tried to wash it off. The color took almost a week to fade away, during which time he avoided going out in public and took time off from work.
The cream was packaged with a lengthy printed insert that detailed a number of possible side effects of varying degrees of probability. A “green pallor” and “irritation” were listed as uncommon side effects. The patient sued the dermatologist for prescribing the medicine and established the above facts. He also testified that he would not have taken the medicine had he been informed of all of the potential side effects.
If the dermatologist is found to be not liable to the patient, it will be because:CorrectIncorrect
A driver drove a 1967 car without a third brake light in the rear window. The driver’s left rear brake light was functioning, and a police officer pulled him over and warned him to fix the light. A week later the driver’s neighbor, who owns an identical car, stole the driver’s right rear brake light to replace a broken light of her own. The driver was completely unaware that the light was stolen since the driver’s neighbor had carefully replaced the light’s red encasement. He still had not fixed the left light. Later in the day the driver stopped short in the middle of a highway to prevent hitting a grasshopper. Since neither of the driver’s tail lights worked properly, a second driver who was driving behind the first driver did not realize he should stop until it was too late. He collided with the first driver. Both sides agree that the collision would not have occurred if either of the lights were properly functioning.
If the second driver asserts a civil claim against the first driver’s neighbor, the likely result is that the first driver’s neighbor’s actions will be found to be:CorrectIncorrect