| { | |
| "id": -1, | |
| "prompt": "An ordinance of City makes it unlawful to park a motor vehicle on a City street within ten feet ofa fire hydrant. At 1:55 p.m. Parker, realizing he must be in Bank before it closed at 2:00 p.m., and finding no other space available, parked his automobile in front of a fire hydrant on a City street. Parker then hurried into the bank, leaving his aged neighbor, Ned, as a passenger in the rear seat of the car. About 5 minutes later, and while Parker was still in Bank, Driver was driving down the street. Driver swerved to avoid what he mistakenly thought was a hole in the street and sideswiped Parker's car. Parker's car was turned over on top of the hydrant, breaking the hydrant and causing a small flood of water. Parker's car was severely damaged and Ned was badly injured. There is no applicable guest statute.", | |
| "question": "If Ned asserts a claim against Parker, the most likely result is that Ned will", | |
| "a": "recover because Parker's action was negligence per se", | |
| "b": "recover because Parker's action was a continuing wrong which contributed to Ned's injuries", | |
| "c": "not recover because a reasonably Prudent person could not foresee injury to Ned as a result of Parker's action", | |
| "d": "not recover because a violation of a city ordinance does not give rise to a civil cause of action", | |
| "answer": "C: not recover because a reasonably Prudent person could not foresee injury to Ned as a result of Parker's action." | |
| } | |