Comparative Negligence is a principle of tort law that apportions the level of fault among parties involved in an accident. When an incident occurs due to the negligence of more than one party, comparative negligence assesses the degree to which each party’s actions contributed to the occurrence, thereby determining the share of damages they are liable to pay or entitled to receive.
Types of Comparative Negligence
Pure Comparative Negligence
In jurisdictions that follow Pure Comparative Negligence, a plaintiff can recover damages even if they are 99% at fault. However, the recovery will be reduced by their degree of fault. For instance, if damages amount to $100,000 and the plaintiff is 60% responsible for the accident, they can still recover $40,000.
Modified Comparative Negligence
Modified Comparative Negligence has two main variations:
-
50% Bar Rule: The plaintiff can recover damages only if they are less than 50% at fault. If their fault is 51% or higher, they are barred from recovery.
-
51% Bar Rule: The plaintiff can recover damages if their fault is 50% or less, but they are barred from recovery if found 51% or more at fault.
Historical Context
The concept of comparative negligence arose as a fairer approach to contributory negligence, which completely barred recovery if the plaintiff was at any fault. Comparative negligence, thus, provides a more nuanced and equitable system of apportioning damages based on fault.
Applicability
Auto Accidents
In auto accidents where multiple drivers are at fault, comparative negligence helps determine the proportion of damages each driver can claim or must pay.
Workplace Injuries
When multiple parties, including employers and employees, contribute to a workplace injury, comparative negligence assists in determining the liability distribution.
Product Liability
If both the manufacturer and the consumer exhibit negligence that results in harm, comparative negligence can weigh the fault accordingly and allocate reparations.
Related Terms
- Contributory Negligence: An older doctrine where any fault by the plaintiff completely bars recovery.
- Joint and Several Liability: A legal concept where multiple parties can be held liable collectively for the full amount of judgment irrespective of their percentage of fault.
FAQs
How does comparative negligence differ from contributory negligence?
Which states follow comparative negligence?
Can a plaintiff recover damages if they are more at fault than the defendant?
Summary
Comparative Negligence serves as a fairer substitute to contributory negligence by allowing plaintiffs to recover damages even if they bear partial responsibility for an incident. By evaluating the degree of fault among all parties involved, this legal principle aids in the equitable distribution of financial reparations.
References
- Prosser, W. Page. “Comparative Negligence.” Handbook of the Law of Torts.
- Legal Information Institute. “Negligence.” Cornell Law School, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/negligence.
- Restatement (Second) of Torts.
Through comparative negligence, justice can be more precisely meted out, reflective of the complexities of human actions and their consequences.
