When an accident occurs, the first question that comes to your mind is who is liable, responsible, or at fault. In certain accidents, the liable party is known. However, in others, it can be challenging to identify the person at fault. The intricacies of the negligence statute will overwhelm you, mainly if you are the victim and still contributed to the negligence leading to the accident. The information discussed below aims to assist you in fathoming contributory and comparative negligence, which is critical in establishing fault in personal injury matters.

Negligence at a Glance

Negligence is failing to take action that an ordinary party would take in the same situation you are in. Alternatively, it means conducting yourself in a manner an average person would not in your circumstances. The jury typically reviews negligence by considering the results of a situation if a sober individual completed them in your circumstances. The party owing the other an obligation of care or caution will be liable if their neglect causes personal injuries.

Negligence is pivotal in recovering damages. Nevertheless, if you want to elevate your chances of maximum compensation, you should retain the services of an experienced personal injury attorney. A competent attorney will be critical in demonstrating that:

  • The defendant had a duty of care towards you
  • You suffered injuries once the accused breached or violated this duty
  • The accused’s negligence was a violation of duty

Whether you are an individual or an organization, you owe people the obligation to exercise care. The type of duty you owe another party depends on the kind of relationship that exists between you. For example, if you run a business or company, you must provide your employees with a harmless work environment. The issue of negligence arises when one individual with a duty towards another fails to exercise it, exposing the parties they have a responsibility towards to the risk of injury.

Parties Liable in Personal Injury Torts

Personal injury lawsuits usually involve you, the accuser, pursuing reimbursement from a particular defendant. Generally, you can claim 100% of the losses if the defendant is fully liable for the personal injuries. Therefore, immediately after the accident, you will be concerned about whether you contributed to the negligence causing the accident and your portion of the fault because these will affect the damages you will obtain in the lawsuit.

California adopts the comparative fault doctrine, which provides the jury or presiding judges with a formula for distributing fault between the negligent parties. Therefore, the damages you will receive in your claim will be reduced by your portion of the blame for contributing to the mishap that caused your injuries. If the defendant claims you are also partly to blame for your injuries and produces proof to back up the same, the court will settle on the proportion of blame and deduct it from your total damages. You will receive 100% damages if the negligent party is fully liable for the personal injuries.

Comparative Negligence at a Glance

California applies the comparative fault statutes. According to the pure comparative negligence doctrine, you can obtain damages from the defendant, but your portion or level of fault will lower the ultimate recovery. The jury or presiding judge decides your level of negligence leading to the personal injuries. If you are partly responsible for the harm, your portion of fault will reduce your ultimate damages.

The comparative negligence doctrine, therefore, works by lowering the ultimate recoverable damages for your injuries by your fault percentage.

Apportioning Fault Under Comparative Negligence

When you file an injury claim lawsuit in court and no settlement is reached before trial, the court will have instructions on determining comparative fault. If the respondent asserts that your negligence as the plaintiff caused the mishap and subsequent injuries, they should prove the following with a preponderance or majority of evidence:

  • You, the plaintiff, acted negligently
  • Your negligence or fault was a significant cause of your injuries

When the accused proves these facts, your ultimate damages will be lowered by the percentage of negligence the jury awards you.

When apportioning blame to you, the claimant, the respondent, and other parties, the ultimate fault should be 100%.

During the trial, the jury separately establishes your total damages without assuming that you are in any way responsible for the losses. After the close of the case, each respondent will owe you a figure equal to the portion of losses they added to the overall recoverable damages you seek.

A case in point: you provoke a neighbor’s canine by hurling a stone at it, assuming it is on a leash. Upon provocation, you realize that the dog was off-leash. Even if the neighbor’s dog bites you under the circumstances and you sue the neighbor for injuries, you will be partly to blame for the bite because you are the person who provoked the canine.

The jury can agree with the dog owner that you led to the bite injuries, but the neighbor will still be the party to blame for keeping their canine off-leash. When the jury allocates 10% of the blame for the injuries, the compensable damages you will receive from the dog owner will be lowered by 10%.

Comparative Negligence Types

The comparative fault comes in two forms: pure and modified principles. California applies the pure comparative fault doctrine, while states like Nevada adopt modified comparative fault.

States that apply the modified doctrine allow plaintiffs to pursue damages for injuries if they are less than 50% to blame for the losses. You cannot seek damages if you take 50 or 51 percent of the responsibility for the mishap and injuries.

The difference between pure and modified comparative negligence is that in pure comparative fault, you can pursue compensation even if you are primarily responsible for the damages.

Understanding Contributory Negligence

Contributory fault statutes prohibit you from obtaining damages for a personal injury accident if the jury finds you in any way responsible for the damages. It means you cannot receive any damages from the liable party, even if your contribution to the accident was only a small percentage. California no longer adopts the contributory negligence tort law doctrine. Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina are some of the states that still use the principle. The Supreme Court switched contributory negligence with the comparative fault principle in 1975 to bring equality to California personal injury claims.

The Difference Between Comparative and Contributory Negligence

California uses the comparative fault doctrine, which allows you to pursue damages even when you are the primary party responsible for an accident.

Before the current tort law principle, the state used the contributory fault principle, where you could not seek reimbursement for injuries even when you were slightly responsible for the losses. Due to the unfairness of this old doctrine, the Supreme Court pronounced that comparative fault should replace the contributory negligence rule. The court argued that the contributory fault doctrine was unfair because you could not seek compensation even if the plaintiff was 99% accountable for your injuries.

For instance, you are visiting Maryland for a holiday, and while walking down the street to your hotel room, you find an ongoing construction project beside the sidewalk you are using. Near the site, a signboard states that the footpath is temporarily out of use because of the ongoing construction. Sadly, you decide to ignore the warning and use the closed sidewalk. While passing, a brick falls from the building and hits your head, sustaining severe head injuries.

You can file a personal injury suit against the construction company on site for negligence. However, when apportioning fault, the jury will slightly blame you for the mishap because you ignored the warning sign indicating the pavement closure. Because the accident happened in Maryland, which adopts the contributory negligence rule, you will not receive any compensation because you were partly to blame for the personal injuries. Nevertheless, you will receive compensation when the same accident happens in California, which applies the comparative fault principle. However, it will be reduced by the fraction of fault the jury assigns you for the mishap.

Laws that Take Effect When Both Individuals in the Mishap are Suing

In a typical personal injury suit, one party, the victim, normally sues the defendant or liable party for injuries. However, what if both parties sustain injuries and sue each other for negligence? If you and the other party sustain injuries in a mishap and are both to blame for the injuries, you should expect the other to bring a counteroffer when you bring your claim.

The panel will evaluate the evidence presented and then apportion responsibility to all parties involved. Each person will be awarded compensation, which will offset each other. The court will compensate the involved parties separately if the damages do not counterbalance.

The court offers compensation just like when there is one plaintiff and one defendant. It will distribute fault among all the parties involved, including claimants and plaintiffs. The level of fault the court assigns you will signify the compensation you will obtain.

Compensation When Two Parties are Liable for the Mishap

When multiple parties are to blame for a mishap and injuries, the court applies joint and several liability rules. If you find yourself in this situation, you can seek reimbursement from multiple parties for your special damages. However, if only one individual among the defendants has the money to compensate you for the total losses, you can bring a personal injury suit against them alone. The defendant will then sue the other liable parties for reimbursement of their proportion of fault in the mishap.

Nevertheless, when seeking general or non-economic costs, you should sue each liable party separately depending on their fault levels.

Special or economic indemnities you can seek in these cases include lost earnings, medical bills, and property damage.

Viable Defenses for Negligence

When your personal injury suit goes to trial, you, the plaintiff, and the respondent can make your assertions and present evidence. While it is your attorney’s responsibility to prove, with most of the evidence, that the defendant is accountable for your injuries, you should not expect them to go down without a fight. The defendant’s lawyer will argue the following to prevent liability:

The Accused Did Not Owe You a Duty of Care

When proving negligence, you must demonstrate that the law assigns the respondent an obligation to exercise care and avoid any conduct or lack thereof that could cause injury to others. A party is liable for negligence when they disregard their responsibility, leading to an accident and injuries. Therefore, the defendant’s attorney can counter your assertions by arguing that your association with the defendant did not establish a duty of care.

You, The Accuser, Ignored the Threat of Sustaining Injuries

A tortfeasor can assert that you ignored the risk of suffering injuries if you participated in an inherently dangerous activity. Many employers and producers will request that you sign a danger responsibility waiver for the injuries you could sustain on their premises or when using their product. If you have signed such a waiver, the tortfeasor or respondent can argue that you knew of the potential risks but assumed them and, therefore, are not at fault for your injuries.

Despite signing the waiver, employers and producers should take all the necessary measures to protect employees from injuries. Therefore, your personal injury lawyer can find ways to shift the blame for the injuries from you to the accused, enabling you to receive compensation.

You are Responsible for Your Harm or Injuries

The tortfeasor will not go down quickly without a fight, even when you have overwhelming evidence against them. They will try to blame you for the injuries to reduce the financial burden of paying damages. If the defendant’s attorney blames you for your injuries, your attorney should present compelling evidence to show the respondent is liable for the harm. Again, the comparative fault doctrine lets you seek compensation even when at fault.

Cases Where You Can Apply Comparative and Contributory Negligence Rule

You can apply the comparative or contributory fault doctrine in countless personal injury suits. These cases include:

     1. Premises Liability Matters

Comparative and contributory negligence statutes assign property owners the duty to inspect, maintain, and repair the premises. Also, they should provide sufficient warning about dangerous conditions like slippery floors whenever they notice them and immediately begin repairs. Nevertheless, those occupying the property must also act reasonably. Unfortunately, many personal injury incidents occurring in properties are blamed on the occupiers and the property owner.

In cases where the court finds you and the accused responsible for premises liability mishaps, your total compensation will be reduced by the percentage of your fault the court apportions to you. Premises liability mishaps are common in restaurants, workplaces, and amusement parks. And when you are partly to blame for the injuries in these accidents, the court adopts the comparative liability principle. Nevertheless, if the mishap were to happen in a state that adopted the contributory fault rule, you would not receive damages.

     2. Product Liability Incidents

Respondents in product liability matters are designers, manufacturers, and distributors. Comparative negligence laws hold these individuals strictly accountable when injuries stem from their products. The court adopts strict liability when a product fault, design fault, or inadequate warning information causes consumers to suffer injuries or diseases.

The law allows you to sue the defendants in product liability cases, even when you are partly to blame for the injuries or illness arising from the product. The court will reduce your damages by your fault percentage. However, if you were in states like Maryland and North Carolina, you would not be allowed to seek compensation.

     3. Car Accident Incidents

Auto accidents stem from many causes, meaning several parties could be at fault. Car collision incidents where the comparative negligence rule applies include:

  • Bus accidents
  • DUI auto crashes
  • Ridesharing car accidents
  • Head-on-collisions

When there are several proximate accident causes, every party involved will try to blame the other for the mishap. These cases involve several defendants:

  • The company in charge of building or maintaining the road
  • Local authorities charged with road construction and maintenance
  • Car manufacturer
  • Auto repair outlet
  • Employer

In car accident instances where the tortfeasor argues that you are partly liable for the injuries, the jury uses the comparative principle to apportion blame. However, under the contributory fault rule, you cannot seek compensation if you contributed to the mishap and subsequent injuries in any way.

Recoverable Damages in Comparative and Contributory Negligence Incidents

Comparative and contributory fault rules will apply when pursuing special and general damages. Economic or special damages reimburse you for the losses you can attach a monetary value to, like lost income, lost earning capacity, medical bills, and the cost of property repairs or replacements. The court will involve a forensic auditor to add cash value to these losses.

General damages compensate you for losses, such as intangible losses with no dollar value, such as bodily and emotional suffering and loss of life enjoyment. It is not easy to identify all the damages in your case. Therefore, hire a personal injury attorney to evaluate your case and determine the damages you should pursue for maximum compensation.

Find a Competent Personal injury Attorney Near Me

The comparative fault doctrine has brought fairness to personal injury cases where many plaintiffs could have missed reimbursement under the previous contributory fault or negligence rule. At The Personal Injury Attorney Law Firm, we will resolve your case depending on your fault. Demonstrating that the tortfeasor is liable for the injuries elevates the possibility of a positive outcome. Contact us at 800-492-6718 to schedule a meeting.