COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE

\r\n

The doctrine of comparative negligence was developed in response to the harsh rulings in contributory negligence cases. Under this doctrine, a Plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by the proportion of his or her negligence.

\r\n

States (except for those that practice contributory negligence) have different versions of comparative negligence. Check your text for a complete listing and to find out what your state’s version is.

\r\n

There are three models of comparative negligence, which will be described further in this topic’s subtopics. They are:

\r\n

1. Pure comparative negligence

\r\n

2. Modified comparative negligence

\r\n

3. Slight-gross comparative negligence

\r\n

Some states use a combination of approaches.

\r\n

\r\n

Comparative negligence generally applies only to actions involving physical or property damage. A Plaintiff may seek punitive damages, but it is unlikely that a jury would award punitive damages to someone who is partially responsible for his or her own injuries.

\r\n

\r\n

There are defenses, or exceptions, to comparative negligence discussed further in the subtopics of this mindmap.

Defenses to Negligence