Site design bySekimori
« TYPES OF PARALYSIS/PARAPLEGIA - Los Angeles Attorney | Main | Contact Us »
Comparative Negligence Defined
In many jurisdictions, states use the doctrine of comparative negligence to determine whether the plaintiff can recover for damages even though the plaintiff themselves were partially negligent.
By using a comparative negligence standard, the statutes may provide for apportionment of damages between the two parties at fault. For example if the total damage is $100.00 and Plaintiff is 40% at fault and Defendant is 60% at fault then the plaintiff is entitled to $60.00.
There are generally two forms of comparative negligence: Partial and pure comparative negligence. In a partial comparative negligence jurisdiction, most states will bar a recovery for the plaintiff if the plaintiff’s negligence was more than (51%) the negligence of the defendant.
In California, the comparative negligence standard was not adopted by statute but rather by a judicial decision. Under the judicial decision, California applies pure comparative negligence, which states that even if the plaintiff’s negligence exceeds the negligence of the defendant, the plaintiff may still recover the apportionment of damages. For example if total damage is $100.00 and plaintiff is 70% at fault and defendant 30% at fault, then plaintiff is entitled to $30.00.
Posted by Legal Staff
