a. A 12-year-old boy, while crossing a bridge over the defendant's trolley tracks, swung an 8-foot-long wire over the bridge. The wire touched the defendant's uninsulated trolley wire, which ran over the tracks of his trolley and beneath the bridge on which the boy was walking, resulting in an electric shock that injured the boy, who then sued. If the probability of this occurrence was .00001, and the damage to the boy was $10,000,000, should the court hold the defendant trolley company liable if the cost to insulate the wire underneath the bridge was $150? Why or why not?

b. In part a above, what if the situation was that the industry norm was to insulate at a price of $150, as noted in the question, but that this particular trolley owner had access to a substitute cover material that would have protected the boy from harm at a cost to him of $90. Would he be held liable for the damage to the boy even though the industry norm was to insulate at a cost of $150? Explain.