Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
The motorcyclist has sued both the EMS firm and the dealership, alleging that the EMT's careless conduct caused his paralysis.
A motorcyclist participating in the race was injured when he lost control of his motorcycle. The motorcyclist was treated at the scene by the EMTs. In removing the motorcyclist's helmet, one of the EMTs twisted the motorcyclist's neck, causing him to become permanently paralyzed.
A racetrack held a motorcycle race, which was sponsored by a local motorcycle dealership. Under the sponsorship agreement, the dealership was required to arrange for licensed and trained emergency medical technicians (EMTs) to be present during the race. The dealership contracted with a licensed and reputable emergency medical services (EMS) firm that supplied EMTs for events such as these.
This is a last question in category
« Go to questions from category NegligenceThere are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. There is no basis for direct liability; the dealership exercised due care in selecting the EMS firm.
B is incorrect. The duty to provide competent medical care was properly delegated to the EMS firm. Here, the dealership was required to and did, arrange for licensed and trained EMTs to be present for the race.
C is incorrect. The EMS firm was an independent contractor, not an employee of the dealership, so there can be no vicarious liability. Further, the EMT was an employee only of the EMS firm, and any carelessness by the EMT could be imputed only to the EMS firm.