Compare and contrast contributory negligence with comparative negligence

This site should help you make these comparisons.

http://injury.findlaw.com/personal-injury/personal-injury-law/negligence/contributory-comparative-negligence.html

Contributory negligence and comparative negligence are two legal principles used to determine the degree of fault in a personal injury case. Let's delve into each concept and compare them:

1. Contributory Negligence:
Contributory negligence is an older legal doctrine that follows the "all-or-nothing" rule. It states that if a plaintiff (the person bringing the claim) is found even slightly at fault for their injury, they are completely barred from recovering any damages from the defendant (the alleged wrongdoer).

To determine contributory negligence, you need to consider the actions of both parties involved in the incident. If the plaintiff's negligence contributed in any way to the accident, they are considered contributorily negligent. For example, if a pedestrian crosses a road outside of a designated crosswalk and gets hit by a speeding car, the pedestrian may be considered contributorily negligent for not using the crosswalk.

2. Comparative Negligence:
Comparative negligence, on the other hand, is a more modern approach to determining fault in personal injury cases. It recognizes that both parties involved may share some degree of fault, and it allocates damages accordingly. There are two types of comparative negligence:

- Pure Comparative Negligence: Under this rule, damages are awarded based on the proportion of fault assigned to each party, regardless of the percentage. For example, if a plaintiff is found 30% at fault and the defendant is found 70% at fault, the plaintiff can still recover 70% of the damages.

- Modified Comparative Negligence: Modified comparative negligence comes in two forms, one with a threshold and one without. In both versions, the plaintiff can only recover damages if their percentage of fault is below a certain threshold (typically 50% or 51%). If the plaintiff's negligence exceeds the threshold, they are barred from recovery. If their negligence falls below the threshold, their damages are reduced proportionally to their degree of fault. For example, in a case where the plaintiff is 40% at fault and the defendant is 60% at fault, the plaintiff can recover damages, but they will be reduced by 40%.

To apply comparative negligence, you need to assess the facts and evidence of the case, consider the actions of each party involved, and assign a percentage of fault to each party based on their level of negligence or contribution to the incident.

In summary, while both contributory negligence and comparative negligence address the issue of shared fault in personal injury cases, they differ in terms of the outcomes. Contributory negligence completely bars the plaintiff from recovering damages if they are found at any degree of fault, while comparative negligence allocates damages proportionally based on the percentage of fault assigned to each party.