Posted By on 19 Feb 2012 06:46 PM I agree that it's answer choice C. I think that answer choice A would have been correct had the woman been a licensee and not a trespasser under strict liability rules, but C is definitely the correct answer because it hits an exception to the general rule under strict liability for wild animals. Answer choices B and D can easily be eliminated because they do not address strict liability. Ultimately, I eliminated answer choice A because, while it implied (i.e., using "domesticated animal" to suggest bobcat as a wild animal), answer choice C gave direct statements of both rule and fact specific to strict liability. Additionally, choice C answers to the trespass exception to te strict liability rule for wild animals. I've learned from Kaplan that, whenever faced with two possible correct answers where one presents an exception to negate the other possible correct answer, one should select the answer giving the exception. Hope this helps. :)
It is easier to argue in favor of the answer once its posted. Here we are dealing with a "known trespasser" hence duty is owed. SL is liability without fault. So whether D exercised due care should be irrelevant, since D will be liable without fault. The premise (argument) that D tried to make cat less dangerous is ridiculous, if this is the case, whats the purpose of SL. Lets just move on.
Contact: JDJinx @ GMail.com
TXT : (312) 554-5379