A principle of tort law which looks at the negligence of the victim. If the victim's negligence, when compared with the defendant's, is equal to or greater in terms of contributing to the situation which caused the injury or damage, such comparative negligence may lead to either a reduction of the award against the defendant, proportionate to the contribution of the victim's negligence, or even prevent an award altogether.
The responsibility for damages is reduced based on the extent of negligence the injured party contributed to their own loss.
The rule under which negligence is measured by percentage, and damages are diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to the person seeking recovery.
in workers compensation law defenses, a negligent employee may recover a portion of his damages.
A defense to negligence where fault is measured in percentages and any damages shall be reduced by that percentage. See also contributory negligence.
the comparing of responsibility between the plaintiff and the defendant or defendants
A legal doctrine, adopted in most jurisdictions, which modifies the strict rules of contributory negligence by allowing negligent plaintiffs/victims to recover damages from defendants/perpetrators by reducing the amounts of damages by the applicable percentage of the plaintiff's/victim's negligence. (See also: Contributory Negligence.)
The doctrine by which acts of the opposing parties in a civil action are compared in the degrees of "slight," "ordinary," and "gross" negligence.
The proportional sharing of liability between a plaintiff and defendant for damages based upon the percentage of negligence of each. Not all states allow a sharing of liability based on comparative negligence. Replaced contributory negligence in Washington in 1981; see RCW 4.22.005. Class
The doctrine by which acts of the opposing parties are compared to determine the proportion of liability which each shares for the injury which is the basis of the action.
(law) negligence allocated between the plaintiff and the defendant with a corresponding reduction in damages paid to the plaintiff
The degree to which the plaintiff is at fault (if at all) when compared to the fault of the defendant. A jury determines comparative negligence after hearing the facts of the case and the relevant law as instructed by the Judge. Damages may be reduced or apportioned as a result of plaintiff's comparative negligence.
An aspect of personal injury law whereby an injured person can collect damages only in the percentage she or he was not a fault in causing an accident.
A rule whereby a plaintiff's damages are reduced to the extent of the plaintiff's degree of negligence. Plaintiff's negligence does not altogether bar a suit.
In some states the negligence of both parties to an accident is established in proportion to the degree of their contribution to the accident. Several states have comparative negligence laws, and each one varies somewhat from the others. This is in contrast to contributory negligence, which is a general common law rule.
A more modern system of allocating damages between two or more persons than the method of contributory negligence, which remains effective in many states (under which one cannot collect damages for bodily injury or property damage caused by another party's negligence if one were oneself in any way negligent). Under comparative negligence, the damages collectible in relation to another person are diminished in proportion to one's degree of negligence. In most instances, damages cannot be collected at all if the claimant's negligence was greater than that of the other party. Currently, in a few instances, the courts have awarded both parties damages as a percent of the total damages, depending on respective degrees of fault.
Law that allows an injured party to collect from another party for a loss, even when the injured party contributed to his or her own loss. Damages are reduced to the extent of the injured party’s negligence.
That doctrine in the law of negligence by which the negligence of the parties is compared, in the degrees of "slight", "ordinary", and "gross" negligence, and a recovery permitted, notwithstanding the contributory negligence of the plaintiff.
Under this concept a plaintiff (the person bringing suit) may recover damages even though guilty of some negligence. His or her recovery, however, is reduced by the amount or percent of that negligence.
Comparing the plaintiff's contributory negligence to the defendant's negligence. Pennsylvania's Comparative Negligence statute states that when a plaintiff is guilty of contributory negligence and that negligence was not greater than the defendant's negligence, the plaintiff's damages will be diminished in proportion to his negligence in causing the accident.
A variation of contributory negligence, in which the comparative degree of negligence for each party to an accident is taken into account when awarding damages.
A method of assessing negligence in an accident case which considers all parties whose negligence contributed the accident in any way. Not all states use comparative negligence. Some states still use contributory negligence.
The percentage of fault in an auto accident determined by comparing two drivers carelessness to each others. I.E. If you were 25% at fault and the other person was 75% at fault, the other person (or his insurance company) must pay 75% of the fair compensation for your injuries. A formula for holding each party accountable for the amount of damages that they caused.
Negligence of a plaintiff in a civil suit which decreases his recovery by his percentage of negligence compared to a defendant's negligence.
The percentage of fault shared by each driver in an accident in which both contribute to causing the collision.
That doctrine in the law of negligence by which the negligence of the party is compared in degrees of slight, ordinary, or gross, and a recovery permitted, notwithstanding the contributory negligence of the plaintiff, when the negligence of the plaintiff is slight and that of the defendant gross; but refused when the plaintiff has been guilty of a want of ordinary care, thereby contributing to his injury; or when the negligence of the defendant is only ordinary or slight when compared with the contributory negligence of the plaintiff.
A defense to negligence used when it is believed that the plaintiff's negligence contributed to his or her injuries. Based on the amount of negligence by each party, the amount of damages is adjusted accordingly.
Legal doctrine by which negligence of plaintiff determines amount plaintiff may recover from defendant. Compare contributory negligence.
The legal principle whereby an injured party can recover a portion of the damage for his or her injuries if he or she were also negligent. In some jurisdictions, a plaintiff can recover only if his or her negligence is less (or not more) than the defendant's negligence.
The more prevalent approach to reducing amounts paid to plaintiffs/victims allowing partially negligent plaintiffs/victims to recover damages from defendants/perpetrators, however, reducing the amounts of the award by the applicable percentage of the plaintiff's/victim's own negligence (see also: Contributory Negligence).
The doctrine of comparing degrees of fault among the responsible parties.
Under the law, a situation where responsibility for an injury may be apportioned to different parties (including the claimant) on the basis of the degree of negligence, usually by a percentage, attributed to each.
doctrine used in civil cases where damages are computed based on the percentage of negligence of each party involved
The process of apportioning damages and liability to multiple parties, determined by the proportion of fault in an incident.
A principle of tort law which looks at the negligence of the victim and which may lead to either a reduction of the award against the defendant, proportionate to the contribution of the victim's negligence, or which may even prevent an award altogether if the victim's negligence, when compared with the defendant, is equal to or greater in terms or contributing to the situation which caused the injury or damage.
In the United States, comparative negligence is a system of apportioning recovery for a tort based on a comparison of the plaintiff's negligence with the defendant's. It contrasts with the doctrine of contributory negligence, which disallows recovery by a plaintiff whose actions in some way, however small, contributed to the tort. Neither comparative negligence nor contributory negligence should be confused with joint and several liability which compares the fault of two or more defendants.