benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU / Some homeless people started residing on a strip of land located under a bridge.…

Problem

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

question

Some homeless people started residing on a strip of land located under a bridge. The land was owned by a nearby chemical manufacturer. The squatters did not ask permission, and the company did not feel it was an urgent problem. The squatters used a small lake on the property for bathing and drinking water. Within a few days, two squatters died from what was later revealed to be highly polluted water coming from the company's waste discharges. The company knew that it had a waste discharge problem. The estates of the two decedents sued the company. Will they likely prevail on their tort claim despite the company's defense that the decedents were trespassers?

choices

  1. Yes, because even though they trespassed, the owner had a duty to warn because it knew that they were in danger.
  2. Yes, because the owner was strictly liable for any injuries caused by the hazardous condition of the water in the lake.
  3. No, because owner owes no duty to trespassers except if it acts with willful or wanton disregard.
  4. No, because an owner of land never has to worry about protecting the safety of trespassers.

subject

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

Official source

initial import