benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1026 / A plumbing company hired a worker to work at various construction sites. The…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

A plumbing company hired a worker to work at various construction sites. The worker used his own truck to travel between the company's warehouse and the construction sites, but the company fitted the truck with a rack for carrying plumbing pipes. The company paid the worker for traveling between the warehouse and the construction sites, but not for his drive to and from work. Because the worker was required to haul pipes on his truck while driving between the warehouse and the construction sites, the company asked the worker, before hiring him, whether he had a valid driver's license. The worker represented that he did, although in fact his license had been suspended because he had been convicted of recklessly causing motor vehicle collisions. The company made no effort to verify the worker's representation. While driving to work one morning in his truck, the worker carelessly caused a collision in which a woman was injured. In her subsequent action against the plumbing company, based on a theory of negligent hiring, is the woman likely to prevail?

category

law

options

  1. No, because the company was not responsible for the worker's actions during his commute to work.
  2. No, because the worker was an independent contractor.
  3. No, because the worker was responsible for his own actions outside of work hours.
  4. No, because the company was not aware of the worker's suspended license.
  5. Yes, because the company should have taken more care in verifying the worker's credentials.
  6. Yes, because the company fitted the worker's truck with a pipe rack.
  7. Yes, because the company had a duty to ensure that its workers had valid driver's licenses.
  8. No, because the company's duty to use reasonable care in hiring a competent driver extended only to actions taken by the worker in the scope of his employment.
  9. Yes, because the worker was using a truck fitted by the company at the time of the accident.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

upstream_id / Original problem ID
1026
task_id
ee840529-07df-5a96-9f23-4caf07d0d274
task_key
default--test--1026
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import