[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-320521-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":73,"doc-detail-320521-en":122},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":66,"head_meta":68,"extra_data":70,"updated_unix":72},105,"en","february-2019-mee-question-1-torts","February 2019 MEE - Question 1 - Torts","","February 2019 MEE Question 1 focuses on Torts through a winter-storm car accident followed by a serious hospital-acquired infection. The woman driver is alleged negligent despite driving below the posted speed limit. The hospital and the driver are also challenged regarding liability for infection damages, including proof issues about exposure sources, foreseeability, and causation. The analysis discusses negligence standards, foreseeable intervening medical risks, and res ipsa loquitur principles for inferring hospital negligence.",{"@graph":14,"@context":65},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/february-2019-mee-question-1-torts/320521/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/february-2019-mee-question-1-torts/320521.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Graffin","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-01","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How could the man recover against the hospital when he cannot prove when or how he contracted the infection?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Res ipsa loquitur may permit recovery if the infection normally does not occur without negligence and other responsible causes are sufficiently eliminated by the evidence. The discussion explains this approach for inferring hospital negligence.","Answer","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":67,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":69,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":71,"site_id":7},320521,1790458901,{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":75},"success",[76,80,84,87,92,97,101,106,111,114,118],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":77,"show_sort_weight":78,"slug":79},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":81,"show_sort_weight":82,"slug":83},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},70,"exam",{"id":88,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":93,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":94,"show_sort_weight":95,"slug":96},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":109,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":113},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":115,"slug":117},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":119,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":88,"slug":121},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":123},{"doc_id":71,"user_id":124,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":125,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":126,"file_id":127,"file_url":128,"file_type":129,"file_size":130,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":131,"language":132,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":133,"faqs":134,"seo_title":135,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":136,"read_time":137,"preview_page_count":4},3573418547284,"https://eur-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_994ba38a5ba835b3df7d355c54d3ed8d","February 2019 MEE Question 1  \nTorts  \nCopyright © 2019 by the National Conference of Bar Examiners.  \nAll rights reserved.  \nFEBRUARY 2019 MEE  \nQUESTION 1—TORTS  \nOne year ago, a man was injured when the car in which he and a woman were traveling slid off an icy highway during a winter storm and overturned. At the time of the accident, the woman was driving the car. The man was sitting in the front passenger seat, wearing his seat belt. The woman was driving 40 mph at the time of the accident, although the posted speed limit was 50 mph.  \nThe man and the woman were rushed to a local hospital in its ambulance. There, hospital surgeons performed emergency surgery on the man. The man remained in the hospital for 10 days following his admission. Numerous medical instruments were used during his surgery and subsequent hospitalization, including needles, clamps, and surgical tools. However, he did not receive a blood transfusion or any blood products.  \nThree days after the man was released from the hospital, he developed a fever and visited his personal physician, who is not affiliated with the hospital. The physician ordered routine blood tests. The tests revealed that the man had a serious infection that is transmitted in nearly all cases through exposure to either contaminated blood products or improperly sterilized medical instruments (needles, clamps, surgical tools, etc.) that come into contact with a patient’s blood. There are, however, other possible sources of the infection in a hospital environment, such as a failure of staff to follow proper handwashing techniques to avoid transmitting infection from one patient to another and staff failure to properly identify and discard certain used medical instruments that cannot safely be sterilized.  \nInfections occurring in individuals who have not received a blood product and have not been hospitalized during the period of likely exposure are possible but rare. The physician told theman that he “must have contracted this infection at the hospital” because the period between infection and symptom development is 10 to 13 days and the man was a patient at the hospital during the entire relevant period. The physician also stated that “at hospitals that have adopted medical-instrument sterilization procedures recommended by experts, cases of this infection have been almost completely eliminated.” The man has no history of intravenous drug use, and he did not receive any medical treatment for several months before his hospital stay. All sterilization procedures at the hospital are performed by hospital employees. However, the particular sterilization procedure used while the man was hospitalized cannot be determined because, while the hospital now uses the sterilization procedure recommended by experts, thereis no record of when it started using that procedure.  \nThe man has sued the woman and the hospital, alleging negligence. Neither defendant is judgment-proof, and this jurisdiction has no automobile-guest statute. The parties have stipulated that the man’s damages for the injuries he suffered in the accident are $100,000 and his damages from the infection he contracted are $250,000 .  \n1. Could a court properly find that the woman was negligent even though she was driving below the posted speed limit? Explain.  \n2. Could a court properly find that the woman is liable for the man’s damages resulting from the infection? Explain.  \n3. Could a court properly find that the hospital is liable for the man’s damages resulting from the infection? Explain.  \n4. If a court found that both the woman’s negligence and the hospital’s negligence caused the man’s infection, could the woman’s liability be limited to $100,000 for injuries theman suffered in the accident? Explain.  \nFebruary 2019 MEE Analysis 1  \nTorts  \nCopyright © 2019 by the National Conference of Bar Examiners.  \nAll rights reserved.  \nFEBRUARY 2019 MEE  \nANALYSIS 1—TORTS  \nThis February 2019 analysis for the MEE was provided to","cbCaicNTT1ge85Pe","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicNTT1ge85Pe","pdf",1176277,48,"English","# Question 1 - Torts\n## Negligence despite driving under the limit\n## Liability for infection damages against the woman\n## Liability for infection damages against the hospital\n## Limiting liability for accident injuries if both defendants are negligent\n# Analysis 1 - Torts\n## Legal Problems\n## Summary","[{\"question\":\"How could the man recover against the hospital when he cannot prove when or how he contracted the infection?\",\"answer\":\"Res ipsa loquitur may permit recovery if the infection normally does not occur without negligence and other responsible causes are sufficiently eliminated by the evidence. The discussion explains this approach for inferring hospital negligence.\"}]","February 2019 MEE - Question 1 - Torts | PDF",1789950089,121]