Which of the following is a doctrine that has been adopted by courts to aid plaintiffs in establishing negligence claims?

Courts usually award punitive damages in cases in which the offender has committed ______. 
A. Negligence
B. Strict liability offense
C. A res ipsa loquitur offense
D. Compensatory negligence
E. Gross negligence

Courts usually award punitive damages in cases in which the offender has committed gross negligence, an action committed with extreme reckless disregard for the property or life of another person.

Which of the following is a doctrine that has been adopted by courts to aid plaintiffs in establishing negligence claims? 
A. Res ipsa loquitur only.
B. Negligence per se only.
C. Assumption of risk only.
D. Res ipsa loquitur and negligence per se.
E. Res ipsa loquitur, negligence per se and assumption of risk.

Res ipsa loquitur literally means "the thing speaks for itself." The plaintiff uses this doctrine to allow the judge or jury to infer that more likely than not, the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm, even though there is no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of due care. Negligence per se applies to cases in which the defendant has violated a statute enacted to prevent a certain type of harm from befalling a specific group to which the plaintiff belongs. If the defendant's violation causes the plaintiff to suffer from the type of harm that the statute intends to prevent, the violation is deemed negligence per se.

When would a defendant use the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur? 
A. To allow the judge and jury to infer that more likely than not, the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm, even though there is no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of due care.
B. To allow the judge and jury to infer that more likely than not, the defendant's negligence was not the cause of the plaintiff's harm.
C. To allow the judge and jury to presume the plaintiff is guilty of contributory negligence.
D. To allow the judge and jury to presume the plaintiff destroyed evidence.
E. None of the above.

Res ipsa loquitur literally means "the thing speaks for itself." The plaintiff uses this doctrine to allow the judge or jury to infer that more likely than not, the defendant's negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's harm, even though there is no direct evidence of the defendant's lack of due care.

Assuming res ipsa loquitur is established, what is the effect of that doctrine? 
A. It requires a finding of negligence.
B. It prohibits a finding of negligence.
C. The burden of proof shifts to the plaintiff.
D. The burden of proof shifts to the defendant.
E. The burden of proof rises to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Once the plaintiff has demonstrated the elements required for a finding of res ipsa loquitur, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant, who must prove that he was not negligent to avoid liability.

Which of the following is true regarding the law of negligence in Germany? 
A. It is the same as the law of negligence in the United States.
B. It focuses only on conscious negligence.
C. It focuses only on unconscious negligence.
D. Courts distinguish between conscious and unconscious negligence with defendants who have engaged in only conscious negligence being found not guilty.
E. Courts distinguish between conscious and unconscious negligence with defendants who have engaged in only unconscious negligence being found not guilty.

German courts distinguish between conscious and unconscious negligence. Conscious negligence requires knowledge that the offense is about to occur and that it is an actual offense. Unconscious negligence occurs when the defendant is either unaware that the act constitutes an offense or unaware that the act is occurring at all. In such cases, the defendant is found not guilty by reason of unconscious negligence.