In California personal injury cases, the doctrine of comparative negligence allows for the plaintiff’s own actions to be considered when determining liability. Under comparative negligence, the court assesses whether the plaintiff’s behavior contributed to the injury and, if so, assigns a percentage of fault. For example, if the plaintiff was texting while walking and failed to notice a wet floor in a store, the court may find that the plaintiff’s inattention contributed to the injury. In such cases, the defendant may still be liable, but the plaintiff’s recovery could be reduced in proportion to their degree of fault. If the plaintiff is found to be partially at fault, their compensation for damages will be reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to them.
The court will evaluate the specific circumstances of the case to determine the extent to which the plaintiff’s actions contributed to the injury. For instance, if a driver was speeding and caused an accident, but the plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt, the court might reduce the plaintiff’s award because their failure to wear a seatbelt contributed to the severity of the injury. Ultimately, the comparative negligence rule ensures that liability is shared based on each party’s contribution to the accident, allowing for a more equitable distribution of fault and damages.
Law Offices of James R. Dickinson – 909-848-8448
How To Schedule A Consultation:
Please call us at 909-848-8448 to schedule a free consultation/case evaluation or complete the form immediately below. [Please note certain formalities must be completed to retain the Law Offices of James R. Dickinson, such as the signing of a legal fee agreement [see “Disclaimers”]].