Defenses To General Negligence Lawsuits And Claims

Under the general negligence statutes, the person whose negligence and recklessness caused injury to other people is legally liable and should provide compensation for the damages and harm.

According to Los Angeles attorneys, there are four elements that will establish a strong case of negligence and these are: 1.) The defendant has the duty to provide safety to other people. 2.) There is a breach of that duty. 3.) The defendants action is the direct cause of the injury. 4.) The negligence resulted to injuries.

However, there are conditions in which a person may escape liability, or at least reduce the amount of claims, even if their actions have also contributed to the injuries of another individual.

Contributory negligence. Under the contributory negligence statute, a person who is injured due to his own recklessness may not be able to file for claims, even if the other party is also negligent.

For example, two speeding drivers collided with each other. However, only one of them sustained injuries in the accident. Since both parties are negligent, no one has the right to receive compensation and claims.

Under the doctrine of contributory negligence, a plaintiff will not be able to recover damages in case that he has contributed to his own injuries. With such condition, contributory negligence may lead to unfair result. For instance, a negligent driver whose action is considered grave will most likely avoid liability if the injured persons action has slightly contributed to the accident.

Negligent individuals can also be premise owners and manufacturers whose actions or lack of action will result to injuries to themselves, this doctrine may not force them to practice due diligence.
With these arguments, many courts have weakened the principle of contributory negligence.

Comparative negligence. Pure contributory negligence may lead to unfair results, thus, many courts have adopted the doctrine of comparative negligence.

Under the legal theory of comparative negligence, the amount of claims will depend on the percentage of negligence of a certain individual. For example, a pedestrian is 25 percent at fault for his injuries (because he did not look before crossing the road) is awarded by the court with $200,000 claims. Because the victim has also contributed to his injuries, the award will be reduced to $150,000.

However, many states adopt the 50 percent rule which means that a plaintiff will not recover damages if his negligence is equal or greater than the defendants.

Meanwhile, some states follow the pure comparative negligence. In this doctrine, a plaintiff who is 70 percent at fault for his injuries can still recover damages from the defendant.

Risks which are obvious. If the defendant can prove that the plaintiffs injuries were caused by a dangerous condition that any reasonable person could easily identify, he can avoid liability.

Also, if the plaintiff has consented to the danger, the defendant will not be liable for the injuries. For example, a surfer who injured his foot from a jagged coral cannot file for negligent claims against the resort owner since it is presumed that such water-sports activity has its risk.