Book Opener

no longer follow this doctrine, however, because it is unfair to plaintiffswho may have been only slightly negligent. These states haveadopted another standard called comparative negligence.Comparative NegligenceThe negligence of each party is compared under the doctrine ofcomparative negligence , and the amount of the plaintiff’s recovery isreduced by the percent of his or her negligence. Comparative negligenceprotects plaintiffs from realizing huge losses for comparativelyminor acts of negligence.Example 7. Jason Cohen sued Mark Goodhue for damages sufferedin an automobile accident. The jury found the damages tobe $100,000, and also found that Jason was 10 percent negligentand Mark was 90 percent negligent. As a result, Jasonrecovered $90,000 instead of the full amount of damages.Most states that use comparative negligence follow the 50 percentrule. The plaintiff is allowed to recover part of the award as long as hisor her negligence was not greater than that of the defendant. If theplaintiff’s negligence exceeds 50 percent, he or she recovers nothing.Assumption of RiskIf the defendant can show the plaintiff knew of the risk involvedand still took the chance of being injured, he or she may claimSTRICT LIABILITYStrict liability involvesthe performance of anultrahazardous activity.What activities mightyou classify as ultrahazardous?92 Unit 1: Knowing About the Law