Stephan is the plaintiff in a negligence action against Viola. The jury determines that Stephan has suffered $250,000 in damages, but that he is 20% responsible for his own injuries. Under comparative negligence, how much money would Viola have to pay Stephan in damages? What if the jury determines that Stephan is 60% responsible? Explain the different results under pure and mixed comparative negligence rules.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Under the rule of comparative negligence, the plaintiff’s damages are measured by the relative degree of negligence of both parties. The jury ruled that the damages were $250,000 and the plaintiff was 20% at fault, so he would recover $200,000. Some states have a pure comparative negligence rule, which allows even the plaintiff who is 99% liable for his own injuries to recover the 1% for which the defendant is liable. Other states have adopted a mixed comparative negligence rule. Mixed comparative negligence holds that if the plaintiff is more negligent than the defendant he recovers no damages, but if the defendant is more liable than the plaintiff, then the damages will be reduced by the extent of the defendant’s contributory negligence. If Stephan is 60% responsible, he would recover nothing in a mixed comparative negligence state. In a state that has adopted the pure comparative negligence rule, he would recover $100,000, or 40% of his damages.