In Toms v$.$ Calvary Assembly of God, the court refused to apply a strict liability standard to

a church's fireworks display. Suppose the farmer had been able to prove he told the church

leaders that his cows would be spooked and could hurt themselves, the church did not follow

the distance guidelines the government imposed, and the church used bigger and louder

fireworks than the government hae approved. What result?

The farmer would have a worse chance as he could still not prove strict liability

The farmer has a much better chance as he might be able to prove negligence as a

reasonable person would not have set off fireworks as described

The farmer would have a much worse chance as he would still have no evidence of

negligence

The farmer has a much better chance as the cows would like the bigger fireworks

more