United States
Hong KongTexas Personal Lines Liability and Negligence Practice Questions
These original questions test negligence, legal liability, comparative responsibility, damages, and personal liability coverage.
- Work from the facts: duty, breach, causation, injury, the responsible party, and the relevant policy grant.
- Texas proportionate-responsibility rules can reduce or bar a claimant’s recovery, while policy terms still govern whether an insurer responds.
On this page11 sections
Liability questions are easier when you separate two questions that test writers often place in the same story: Is someone legally responsible, and does a particular policy cover that responsibility? Negligence is a liability theory. A liability policy is a contract. Proof of one does not automatically answer the other.
These original questions test negligence, legal liability, comparative responsibility, damages, and personal liability coverage. Work from the facts: duty, breach, causation, injury, the responsible party, and the relevant policy grant. Texas proportionate-responsibility rules can reduce or bar a claimant’s recovery, while policy terms still govern whether an insurer responds.
- Read the prompt
- Identify the legal or policy question before selecting a rule.
- Apply the actual wording
- Do not add facts or form terms the scenario does not provide.
- Check statutory scope
- Texas law may contain a specific trigger, deadline, threshold, or exception.
- Separate concepts
- Liability, coverage, limits, claim timing, and regulatory violations are related but distinct.
For negligence, look for a duty, a failure to use reasonable care, actual and proximate causation, and legally recognized harm. For coverage, identify the insured, the event, the type of harm, the policy territory and period, the coverage grant, and any exclusion or condition. If the question gives no coverage limitation, do not invent one.
A disciplined way to work each question
Texas proportionate responsibility is a common exam trap. Chapter 33 generally reduces a claimant’s damages by the claimant’s percentage of responsibility and bars recovery when that percentage is greater than 50 percent, subject to statutory details and exceptions. It is not a rule that every negligent party pays an equal share.
For each item, write down the actor, the conduct or loss, the governing contract or statute, and the exact fact that triggers the rule. Then test every answer choice against that fact. Distractors often quote a real rule but apply it to the wrong claimant, time period, coverage part, license holder, or statutory chapter. If the question leaves an endorsement, exception, or policy definition unstated, say what must be checked rather than inventing the missing text.
| Issue | Question to ask | Frequent mistake |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Does the insuring agreement apply, and is an exclusion or condition triggered? | Treating an accident or loss as automatically covered. |
| Legal rule | What statutory provision governs this exact conduct? | Using a familiar deadline or limit outside its scope. |
| Evidence | Which stated facts prove or fail to prove an element? | Adding assumptions that are absent from the stem. |
| Result | Is this the maximum limit, an available remedy, or a final liability finding? | Confusing an insurance payment cap with damages or legal liability. |
Original practice questions and explanations
Question 1
A homeowner leaves a garden hose stretched across a dim front walk. A visitor trips, suffers a broken wrist, and establishes that a reasonable person would have moved or marked the hose. Which negligence element is most directly shown by the homeowner’s failure to address the hazard?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. Breach of duty. | Correct. The facts identify an unreasonable failure to take care in light of a foreseeable trip hazard. That is evidence of breach. The claimant still must establish the remaining elements, and the specific premises duty can depend on visitor status and circumstances. |
| B. Insurable interest. | Incorrect. Insurable interest concerns a financial or legally recognized stake in insured property. It does not describe the homeowner’s conduct toward a visitor. |
| C. Comparative responsibility automatically over 50%. | Incorrect. Nothing assigns a percentage of fault to the visitor. A trip alone does not establish that the claimant was more than 50 percent responsible. |
| D. Contractual indemnity. | Incorrect. No contract shifting liability is described. The question asks about tort negligence, not an agreement to reimburse another party. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: The facts identify an unreasonable failure to take care in light of a foreseeable trip hazard. That is evidence of breach. The claimant still must establish the remaining elements, and the specific premises duty can depend on visitor status and circumstances. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
Question 2
A driver looks down to read a text, drifts through a stop sign, and strikes a cyclist. The cyclist proves the distraction caused the collision and has medical bills. Which analysis best identifies the negligence chain?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. Duty and breach, causation, and harm must be evaluated; the facts support each but do not decide insurance coverage. | Correct. The driver owes a reasonable-care duty, distraction and failure to stop can be breach evidence, the collision may be causally linked, and medical bills show harm. Civil liability remains fact-specific; the policy question follows separately. |
| B. A traffic citation alone conclusively proves all civil liability. | Incorrect. A citation may be evidence, but it does not automatically settle every civil element, defenses, causation, damages, or the insurer’s coverage position. |
| C. The cyclist must prove the driver intended the injury. | Incorrect. Negligence does not require intent to injure. Intent can matter under a different liability theory or policy exclusion, but it is not a negligence element. |
| D. The insurer owes payment merely because a collision occurred. | Incorrect. An accident does not alone establish insured status, legal liability, covered damages, or satisfaction of policy terms. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: The driver owes a reasonable-care duty, distraction and failure to stop can be breach evidence, the collision may be causally linked, and medical bills show harm. Civil liability remains fact-specific; the policy question follows separately. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
Question 3
A claimant has $100,000 in proven damages. A factfinder assigns 30% responsibility to the claimant and 70% to the insured defendant. Applying the general Chapter 33 reduction rule, what is the claimant’s recoverable amount before other legal or coverage issues?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. $70,000. | Correct. Reduce $100,000 by the claimant’s 30% share: $100,000 × 0.70 = $70,000. The result assumes no statutory exception, settlement issue, or separate limit changes the analysis. |
| B. $30,000. | Incorrect. Thirty thousand dollars is the reduction attributable to claimant responsibility, not the remaining damages. |
| C. $100,000 because claimant fault never affects damages. | Incorrect. Texas proportionate responsibility generally reduces damages for claimant fault when recovery is not barred. |
| D. Zero because any claimant fault bars recovery. | Incorrect. A claimant is not automatically barred for any fault. Under the general rule, the bar applies when the claimant’s responsibility is greater than 50 percent. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: Reduce $100,000 by the claimant’s 30% share: $100,000 × 0.70 = $70,000. The result assumes no statutory exception, settlement issue, or separate limit changes the analysis. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
Question 4
The same claimant is found 51% responsible, with $100,000 in damages. Under the general Chapter 33 threshold, what result follows?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. Recovery is barred under the general rule because responsibility is greater than 50%. | Correct. Chapter 33 generally bars a claimant whose responsibility is greater than 50 percent. This is a threshold rule, so do not merely multiply damages by the other party’s 49% share. |
| B. The claimant recovers $49,000. | Incorrect. A simple reduction would produce $49,000, but the threshold bar applies at 51% under the general rule. |
| C. The insurer pays the whole $100,000 because fault allocation is irrelevant. | Incorrect. Fault allocation can determine whether and how much a claimant may recover. Insurance does not erase the statutory allocation. |
| D. The claimant recovers exactly $50,000. | Incorrect. Fifty percent is not greater than 50 percent; the prompt says 51 percent. The exact percentage matters. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: Chapter 33 generally bars a claimant whose responsibility is greater than 50 percent. This is a threshold rule, so do not merely multiply damages by the other party’s 49% share. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
Question 5
A delivery worker negligently damages a customer’s wall while performing assigned work. The customer sues both worker and employer. Which doctrine may make the employer responsible for the employee’s covered conduct within the scope of employment?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. Vicarious liability. | Correct. Vicarious liability can impose responsibility on an employer for an employee’s tort committed within the scope of employment, subject to applicable law and the facts. It is distinct from whether an insurer covers either defendant. |
| B. Subrogation. | Incorrect. Subrogation concerns an insurer’s recovery rights after paying a covered loss, not an employer’s responsibility for employee conduct. |
| C. Replacement cost. | Incorrect. Replacement cost is a property-loss valuation method. It does not create tort responsibility. |
| D. Contribution clause. | Incorrect. Contribution concerns allocation among insurers or responsible parties in specified contexts, not the basic employer-employee imputation rule. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: Vicarious liability can impose responsibility on an employer for an employee’s tort committed within the scope of employment, subject to applicable law and the facts. It is distinct from whether an insurer covers either defendant. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
Question 6
A child runs into a parked car after a driver negligently backs from a driveway. The family sues the driver for the child’s injury. Which point is soundest before deciding the liability claim?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. Establish duty, breach, causation, damages, and any applicable defenses; age and supervision facts may matter. | Correct. The outcome depends on the negligence facts and applicable rules, including the conduct expected in the circumstances and any comparative responsibility analysis. The child’s age may affect the standard or allocation. |
| B. The driver is automatically liable whenever a child is injured. | Incorrect. Injury does not itself prove breach or causation. Liability depends on evidence and governing law. |
| C. There can be no negligence because the car was moving slowly. | Incorrect. Low speed can be relevant, but it does not eliminate a duty or automatically defeat causation. |
| D. A homeowners policy always pays before an auto policy. | Incorrect. Priority between policies depends on policy language and circumstances. The prompt supplies no policy terms, so no universal order can be assumed. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: The outcome depends on the negligence facts and applicable rules, including the conduct expected in the circumstances and any comparative responsibility analysis. The child’s age may affect the standard or allocation. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
Question 7
A visitor sues an insured after being bitten by the insured’s dog. The homeowner’s policy has personal liability coverage, but the question omits animal exclusions and prior-notice terms. What is the best exam answer?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. Analyze legal liability, then read the actual coverage grant, insured status, exclusions, and conditions. | Correct. The liability claim and insurance response are separate. The policy wording may include or exclude animal-related losses, and the facts can trigger conditions or limitations. Do not infer missing form language. |
| B. Coverage is certain because the claimant was injured on the premises. | Incorrect. Premises location and injury do not resolve insured status, exclusions, or other policy terms. |
| C. Coverage is impossible because animal injuries can never be insured. | Incorrect. No universal exclusion can be inferred. Policies and endorsements vary; analyze the supplied contract. |
| D. Liability coverage pays only damage to the insured’s own property. | Incorrect. Personal liability generally addresses covered legal responsibility to others, while first-party property coverage addresses insured property subject to its own terms. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: The liability claim and insurance response are separate. The policy wording may include or exclude animal-related losses, and the facts can trigger conditions or limitations. Do not infer missing form language. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
Question 8
An insured’s negligent act injures two people. A learner applies one injured person’s per-person limit to all claimants combined. What should the learner do instead?
| Choice | Reasoning |
|---|---|
| A. Apply each claimant’s damages to the per-person cap, then test combined bodily injury against the per-accident cap. | Correct. Split limits impose both an individual cap and an accident-wide bodily injury cap. Determine covered damages and insured liability first, then apply both caps. Allocation may depend on settlement and applicable law. |
| B. Add the property damage limit to every injury claim. | Incorrect. Property damage and bodily injury limits are separate in a split-limit contract; they cannot simply be pooled. |
| C. Ignore all limits whenever negligence is established. | Incorrect. Legal liability does not remove contractual limits. |
| D. Divide the limit equally even when policy language or settlements say otherwise. | Incorrect. Equal division is not a universal rule. The insurer’s obligations, settlement process, claimant count, and policy terms matter. |
Answer: A. Before you move on, state the decisive fact in one sentence. Here it is: Split limits impose both an individual cap and an accident-wide bodily injury cap. Determine covered damages and insured liability first, then apply both caps. Allocation may depend on settlement and applicable law. That reasoning step is more reliable than memorizing the letter, because the next scenario can change one fact and produce a different result.
How to review missed questions
Review an error by category. If you missed the rule, reread the cited statutory or policy concept. If you knew the rule but applied it to the wrong person or coverage part, mark the trigger words in the question. If you selected a plausible distractor, explain out loud why its premise is not supported. On insurance exams, a choice can contain a true sentence and still be wrong because it answers a different question.
Do not memorize scenario numbers as universal claims outcomes. Limits, policy forms, endorsements, insurer types, claim dates, and statutory exceptions can change the result. The exam tests the rule under the facts provided; a real claim requires the issued contract and current law. Use the source list to confirm a provision when a question turns on exact wording.
My view is that the best practice set is one that makes you explain why three options fail, not one that rewards fast recognition of a phrase. Keep a short error log with the rule, the fact you overlooked, and the correction. That turns a missed item into a repeatable check for the next problem.
Common questions
Does negligence require intent?
No. Negligence concerns a failure to use legally required care, not an intent to cause harm. Intentional conduct can raise separate tort and coverage issues, so answer the specific theory in the question.
Does Texas claimant fault always bar recovery?
No. Under the general Chapter 33 rule, claimant damages are reduced by the claimant’s percentage, but recovery is barred when responsibility is greater than 50 percent. Check statutory exceptions and the precise facts.
Does an insurer decide negligence from a citation alone?
A citation can be evidence, but it is not automatically conclusive of civil liability or policy coverage. Insurers investigate facts, legal responsibility, damages, insured status, and contract terms.