1. Which of the following is a defense to a finding of strict liability:

a. contributory negligence

b. comparative negligence

c. both of the above

d. none of the above

1. Laura's Restaurant served Ronald the equivalent of 15 drinks, in 2 hours. Ronald's

blood-alcohol content was 3 times the legal limit. As Ronald was driving at 100 mph,

Ronald crashed into the Hoffman family, and killed their 6-month old child. If the

Hoffman family sued Laura's Restaurant, would they be successful in their claim against

it?

a. No, because Laura's Restaurant cannot be sued

b. No, because Ronald was solely responsible and caused the accident

c. Yes, because Laura's should have taken Ronald's keys before serving him alcohol as it was clear he was already drunk

d. Yes, because Laura's Restaurant was negligent in serving alcohol to a person it knew or should have known was intoxicated