LSAT Explanation PT 22, S4, Q7: Currently, the city of Grimchester is

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following describes an injury for which the city of Grimchester is now liable, but should not be according to the principle cited above? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Misc question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the passage. The city of Grimchester is currently liable for any injury incurred due to a city sidewalk in need of repair or maintenance. However, the sidewalks are so extensive that it is impossible to locate and eliminate every potential danger. The passage suggests that governments should only be liable for injuries on public property if they knew about the danger beforehand and negligently failed to eliminate it.

To simplify this, imagine a small town with a single sidewalk that has a pothole. If the town's government knows about the pothole and does not fix it, they should be liable for any injuries caused by it. However, if they didn't know about the pothole or just learned about it, they should not be held liable.

Now, let's look at the question type: it's a miscellaneous question asking us to identify an injury for which the city of Grimchester is now liable, but should not be according to the principle cited above.

a) The city administration had been informed of the need to repair the sidewalk for several years, so they knew about the danger beforehand and negligently failed to eliminate it. They would be liable under both the current and proposed principles.

b) The shopping bag is not part of the sidewalk itself and is not a result of the sidewalk being in need of repair or maintenance. The city would not be liable under the proposed principle, but the question is asking for a situation where the city is currently liable but should not be according to the proposed principle.

c) The city administration learned of the need to repair the sidewalk minutes before the injury. They knew about the danger beforehand, but it's unclear if they negligently failed to eliminate it. According to the proposed principle, the city should not be liable in this case, making this the correct answer.

d) The sidewalk is perfectly even with no visible defects, so the city would not be liable under either the current or proposed principles.

e) The injury is caused by a pedestrian and not due to the sidewalk being in need of repair or maintenance. The city would not be liable under either the current or proposed principles.

In summary, answer choice C is the correct answer because it describes a situation where the city is currently liable but should not be according to the proposed principle.