This lesson introduces contributory negligence as a defense in negligence claims, explains its traditional effect, and distinguishes it from comparative negligence. It also explores the doctrine’s history, the burden of proof, and the last clear chance principle.
Contributory negligence is a defense that may apply when a plaintiff’s own failure to use reasonable care contributed to the injury for which they seek compensation. In jurisdictions that retain the traditional rule, even a small degree of fault by the plaintiff can completely bar recovery.
All flashcards
What is contributory negligence?
It is a defense based on the plaintiff's own failure to use reasonable care contributing to their injury. Under the traditional pure rule, that contribution may bar recovery completely.
How does pure contributory negligence differ from comparative negligence?
Pure contributory negligence can bar all recovery even when the plaintiff has only a small share of fault. Comparative negligence generally reduces damages in proportion to the plaintiff's share of fault.
What does comparative negligence do to a damages award?
It reduces the award by the percentage of fault assigned to the plaintiff. For example, a 30% plaintiff-fault finding generally reduces the award by 30%.
Why is Butterfield v. Forrester notable?
It is generally recognized as an early case in which a plaintiff's own negligence was treated as undermining the claim that the defendant was the proximate cause of the injury.
What does the last clear chance principle address?
It addresses situations where, despite the plaintiff's negligence, the defendant had the last clear opportunity to prevent the injury and failed to take it.
Quiz questions
What is the traditional consequence of a finding of contributory negligence under the pure rule?Answer: The plaintiff may be barred from recovering any damages.
How does comparative negligence generally account for a plaintiff's share of fault?Answer: It reduces the plaintiff's damages award by the percentage of fault assigned to the plaintiff.
What is the significance of Butterfield v. Forrester in the history of contributory negligence?Answer: It is generally recognized as an early appearance of the doctrine.
In a jurisdiction that places the burden on the defendant, what must the defendant generally establish to raise contributory negligence?Answer: That the plaintiff was negligent and that the negligence contributed to the injury.
What is the central idea behind the last clear chance principle?Answer: A defendant may remain liable if they had the last clear opportunity to prevent the injury and failed to act.