Contributory Negligence Case Study

575 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Introduction to negligence

The General Assembly should vote to change the current law of contributory negligence. It is not completely fair and is too strict. Comparative negligence is a better system because money is given for the percentage the person is not at fault. The pure comparative system should be put in place due to many other states already using it. Few states still use the pure contributory negligence and that is for a good reason. A person can still receive some compensatory damages in the comparative negligence system. I believe that is why around 45 states use comparative negligence for determining fault between two parties in tort suits. North Carolina needs to come to term with the present. Comparative law has been rejected in house or committee which has not allowed it to pass to become a law. Most of the tries to push contributory negligence out of law has only been two or three votes away. The people who opposed it believe that it will cause insurance premiums to rise heavily. They claim it would cost the government …show more content…

Even though there is so much known criticism of the system, they use this to continue the system even when 46 other states rejected the doctrine. Supreme Court claims nothing is settled unless it is done right. They recognize the importance of trends in common law. This urges the acceptance of the comparative negligence doctrine. Since there are so many modifications to the harsh rule of contributory, why not have a switch in the system? Although in the past there was rationality for the four rationales of contributory, these cannot survive scrutiny in the present. It can no longer be said that the negligent plaintiff brought the injury onto himself. Both parties actually brought the injuries. So why not use the stare decisis rules to examine the common laws and reconsider the rejection of contributory negligence. As of now there are no statutes that prevent its

Show More
Related

  • Perin V. Hayne Case Summary

    1160 Words  | 3 Pages

    “In tort law, the doctrine which holds a defendant guilty of negligence without an actual showing that he or she was negligent. Its use is limited in theory to cases in which the cause of the plaintiff's injury was entirely under the control of the defendant, and the injury presumably could have been caused only by negligence”(Burt, M.A., & Skarin, G.D. (2011). In consideration of this, the defendant argues that the second foundation of this principle should be solely based on common knowledge of the situation. Although, there is a experts testimony tartar is no basis in this case , in the experts testimony or anything else, for indicating that the plaintiffs injury resulted from the negligence of the defendant. The court correctly found the defendant not liable under the Res ipsa

    Read More

  • Mamo V Surace Case Study

    1105 Words  | 3 Pages

    The appeal was heard in The NSW Supreme Court, Court of Appeal. The appellant appealed the issue of “blameless accidents” therefore providing new evidence, with the view that the preceding judge made an error recognising the content and scope of duty of care. He also noted the breach of duty of care and causation .

    Read More

  • Iturralde V. Hilo Medical Center Summary

    1172 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hawaiian Laws also contain a doctrine known as contributory negligence. This means a plaintiff cannot recover damages if he or she is more at fault that the defendant. Furthermore, any possible monetary recovery will be decreased in proportion to the plaintiff’s proved fault. (FindLaw, n.d.)

    Read More

  • Case Study of the 4 D's of Negligence

    517 Words  | 2 Pages

    A dentist fits several children with braces. The children are regular patients of the dentist. The results for some of the patients turn out to be unacceptable and damaging. There are children who have developed gum infections due to improperly tightened braces. Some mistakenly had their permanent teeth removed, while others have misaligned bites. A local attorney becomes aware of these incidences, looks further into it, and realizes the dentist has not been properly trained and holds no legal license to practice dentistry or orthodontics. The attorney decides to act on behalf of the displeased patients and files a class action lawsuit. The attorney plans to prove the dentist negligent and guilty of dental malpractice by providing proof using the four D’s of negligence. The four D’s of negligence are duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages.

    Read More

  • Example Of A Negligence Case Study

    722 Words  | 2 Pages

    On Thursday, 11/12/2015, at 17:01 hours, I, Deputy Stacy Stark #1815 was dispatched to a domestic disturbance in progress located at 66 Paper Lane, Murphysboro, IL 62966. It was reported that a 15 year old female juvenile was busting out windows on her mother’s vehicle. Deputy Sergeant Ken Lindsey #2406 and Deputy John Huffman #2903 responded as well.

    Read More

  • Mamo V Surace Case Summary

    1300 Words  | 3 Pages

    Axiak v Ingram (2012) 82 NSWLR 36 (Axiak) was extremely pertinent, standing as the “only decision of this court dealing with the construction of the blameless accident provisions of the MACA”. Critically, the case established that ‘non-tortious negligence’ is excluded from the MACA’s definition of “fault” in s3. Such provisions artificially place fault upon the driver in order to secure CTP claims for victims.

    Read More

  • The Burden of Proof in the Case of Darling vs. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital

    734 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...ulations in the U.S. judicial system is “most define the law as a system of principles and processes by which people in a society deal with disputes and problems, seeking to solve or settle them without resorting to force” (p. 15). Some situations cannot be rectified in a board meeting. However, negligence is in the category of objectives of tort law, it is also the most popular lawsuit pursued by patients against medical professionals against doctors and healthcare organizations (Bal, 2009). Objectives of Tort Law

    Read More

  • A Discussion of George Fletcher’s Paradigm of Reciprocity

    937 Words  | 2 Pages

    The second issue is whether or not the defendant has an obligation to reimburse for an injury. The outcome of this second issue depends whether or not it is rational for the defendant to have to pa...

    Read More

  • Case Study: Race V. Krum

    1665 Words  | 4 Pages

    This trend began to ebb with MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., and the ruling by an appellate court that favored MacPherson, the plaintiff. This case, however, was more a result of political expediency than a reasoned verdict based on fact. In this case, the plaintiff argued that his 1911 Baby Buick had a defective wheel that collapsed while traveling at a low rate of speed, hitting a telephone pole, and pinning him under, breaking his wrist and cracking several ribs; however, the facts of the trial revealed that the accident as it was recounted by the plaintiff was a physical impossibility, but due to the increasing pressures to dispense with privity rulings, the court imposed on the defendant the responsibility of inspecting and discarding defective wheels, implying causal negligence even though the plaintiff had driven the vehicle for more than a year in less than perfect road conditions without a mishap. (MacPherson Tort Story; MacPherson v. Buick Motor Company: Simplifying the Facts While Reshaping the Law, Pg.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Negligence

    887 Words  | 2 Pages

    A series of events unfolded when George, running late for class, parked his car on a steep section on Arbutus drive and failed to remember to set the parking brake. The outcome of not remembering to set the parking brake caused many issues resulting in scrapping a Prius, breaking through fencing, people on the train sustaining injuries, and finally a truck that jack-knifed and caused a 42-car pileup. Could the parties that were injured, from George’s actions, be recovered from under the negligence theory? To understand if George is negligent, it is best to look at the legal issue, the required elements of negligence, the definition and explanation of each element of the case, and finally to draw a conclusion to determine if George is negligent.

    Read More

  • Litigation Explosion

    882 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the articles written by Richard L. Abel and Peter W. Huber both have valid arguments with extremely different viewpoints on the litigation process. Peter W. Huber feels there is too much litigation in our country to where it cripples our society to become more successful. Huber feels there is less encouragement for citizens to take matters in their own hands and take responsibility for their actions. With a rather different perspective Richard L. Abel feels we have too little litigation rather than too much, he believes that manufacturers' products and services cause this and more litigation is actually needed. Abel feels that all injuries that happen to individuals should never go uncompensated. Whether you agree with Abel's theory or Huber's theory on the litigation process today, each makes perfect sense and also has statistics and scenarios to support their theory.

    Read More

  • The Tort of Negligence

    1121 Words  | 3 Pages

    did owe a duty of care to Mrs. Donoghue, in that it was up to them to...

    Read More

  • Negligence Case Study

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.

    Read More

  • Product Liability Case Study

    2110 Words  | 5 Pages

    The rapid industrialization and urbanization had inevitably led to rampant unfair trade practices, most notably fraudulent misrepresentation as to the quality and standard of goods . Accordingly, product liability law had been enacted to raise the standard of goods manufactured and supplied to the consumers, by enabling the consumers to make a defective product liability claim (for compensation) if they suffer any injuries or damages as a result of the product used. In Malaysia, the law concerning liability in defective product is provided for under PART X of Consumer Protection Act 1999 (CPA), which modeled on European Community Directive on Liability for Defective Product 1985 (85/374/EEC) , with further modifications.

    Read More

  • Exclusion Clauses in Contracts

    1248 Words  | 3 Pages

    Section 7 of the CECO stipulates that the liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence could not be excluded or restricted. For ‘other loss or damage’, the liability can be excluded only if the exclusion clause satisfies the requirement of reasonableness. And this section should remain unchanged.

    Read More

More about Contributory Negligence Case Study

Open Document