Contributory Negligence

Definition

Contributory negligence is a legal doctrine that reduces or bars a plaintiff's recovery in a personal injury lawsuit if the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to the injury. It is a concept that applies in the context of both intentional torts and negligence, as well as product and strict liability cases.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Contributory negligence is a complete bar to recovery, meaning the plaintiff is barred from any recovery if they are found to be even slightly negligent.
2. The doctrine of contributory negligence has been replaced by comparative negligence in most jurisdictions, which allows for apportionment of liability based on the parties' relative fault.
3. In a strict liability case, the plaintiff's contributory negligence may still be a defense if it was a superseding cause of the injury.
4. The plaintiff's failure to use reasonable care to mitigate their damages can also be considered contributory negligence.
5. Contributory negligence is a fact-specific inquiry, and the burden of proof is on the defendant to establish the plaintiff's negligence.

Review Questions

• Explain how the doctrine of contributory negligence operates in the context of intentional torts and negligence claims.
  • In the context of intentional torts and negligence claims, the doctrine of contributory negligence can act as a complete bar to the plaintiff's recovery if the plaintiff's own negligence contributed to the injury. This means that even if the defendant was primarily responsible for the harm, the plaintiff's own failure to exercise reasonable care can prevent them from recovering any damages. The rationale behind contributory negligence is to encourage plaintiffs to take reasonable precautions to protect themselves, and to avoid rewarding those who have been careless.
• Describe how contributory negligence applies in product liability and strict liability cases.
  • In product liability and strict liability cases, the plaintiff's contributory negligence may still be a defense, even though these types of claims do not require a showing of the defendant's negligence. If the plaintiff's own negligence was a superseding cause of the injury, meaning it was the primary and intervening cause that broke the chain of causation from the defendant's actions, then the plaintiff's recovery may be reduced or barred. Additionally, the plaintiff's failure to use reasonable care to mitigate their damages can also be considered contributory negligence in these types of cases.
• Evaluate the shift from contributory negligence to comparative negligence in most jurisdictions, and discuss the policy considerations behind this change.
  • The shift from contributory negligence to comparative negligence in most jurisdictions reflects a policy decision to move away from the harsh 'all-or-nothing' approach of contributory negligence. Comparative negligence allows for a more equitable apportionment of liability based on the relative fault of the parties, rather than completely barring recovery for a plaintiff who was even slightly negligent. This change is seen as more just, as it ensures that plaintiffs are not denied recovery for their injuries simply because they were not perfectly careful, and it incentivizes both parties to exercise reasonable care. The policy considerations behind this shift include promoting fairness, encouraging shared responsibility, and aligning the law with common notions of justice and proportionality.

Related terms

Comparative Negligence:

A legal doctrine that apportions liability between the plaintiff and defendant based on their respective degrees of fault.

Assumption of Risk:

A defense that the plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly accepted the risk of harm, thereby relieving the defendant of liability.

Duty of Care:

The legal obligation to exercise a reasonable level of care to avoid causing harm to others.