Question 13 13. In Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad (1928), was the railroad found liable? O No, because the party at fault was the man who brought explosives onto the train O No, because Palsgraf herself was at fault O Yes, because the scale that fell on Palsgraf belonged to the railroad O Yes, because the actions of the railroad employees caused the accident O No, because the accident was not foreseeableQuestion 14 0.5 pts 14. The San Francisco Islamic School (SFIS) is a full-time school in San Francisco that is hiring teachers. SFIS's mission is to "guide our students to absorb the inner dimensions of the Islamic Studies. We want our students to exemplify a Muslim character with a strong faith, a solid knowledge base, the best of manners, and a comfortable openness built on deep understanding of the fundamental principles of our religion, and recognition of genuine ethical universal values." Can SFIS discriminate in its hiring against non-Muslim job applicants? O Yes, if being a practicing Muslim is a bona fide occupational qualification for a teacher at SFIS O No, because discrimination of any kind is always illegal under federal employment law O No, because discrimination of any kind is always illegal under California employment law O No, because SFIS is required to hire applicants with the most teaching experience O Yes, because SFIS has the right to hire anyone for any reasonQuestion 15 15. What is the difference between contributory negligence and comparative negligence? O In contributory negligence, if a plaintiff is at all at fault, the plaintiff's award is reduced by the extent to which the plaintiff is found at fault; in comparative negligence, if a plaintiff is at all at fault, the plaintiff receives no award O In contributory negligence, if a plaintiff is at all at fault, the plaintiff receives no award; in comparative negligence, if a plaintiff is at all at fault, the plaintiff's award is reduced by the extent to which the plaintiff is found to be at fault O In contributory negligence, if a plaintiff is greater than 50% liable, the plaintiff receives no award; in comparative negligence, if a plaintiff greater than 51% liable, the plaintiff receives no award O There is no difference O In contributory negligence, the plaintiff must prove all of the elements of negligence; in comparative negligence, the plaintiff does not have to prove duty, breach or proximate causationQuestion 16 16. The "peppercorn rule" stands for the point that - O . contracts with children and the mentally incompetent are always voidable O the court will not protect a contracting party who negotiated poorly and entered into a bad bargain O offer and acceptance are required elements for all enforceable contracts O a unilateral contract can be an enforceable contract O contracts without consideration are sometimes enforceable