Does NY Need "Health Courts"?
Define That Term #121

Define That Term #120

Saturday's term was comparative negligence, which is defined as:

comparative negligence n. a rule of law applied in accident cases to determine responsibility and damages based on the negligence of every party directly involved in the accident. For a simple example, Eddie Leadfoot, the driver of one automobile, is speeding and Rudy Airhead, the driver of an oncoming car, has failed to signal and starts to turn left, incorrectly judging Leadfoot's speed. A crash ensues in which Airhead is hurt. Airhead's damage recovery will be reduced by the percentage his failure to judge Leadfoot's speed contributed to or caused the accident. Most cases are not as simple, and the formulas to figure out, attribute and compare negligence often make assessment of damages problematic, difficult, and possibly totally subjective. Not all states use comparative negligence (California is a fairly recent convert), and some states still use contributory negligence which denies recovery to any party whose negligence has added to the cause of the accident in any way. Contributory negligence is often so unfair that juries tend to ignore it. See also: contributory negligence damages negligence.

No one guessed this time.

In keeping with the current theme, today's term is:

contributory negligence.

As always, no dictionaries, please.

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The comments to this entry are closed.