Define That Term #120
Wednesday's NY Legal News Round Up

Define That Term #121

One of my readers, Perry, was kind enough to point out in an e-mail that yesterday's term, contributory negligence, was essentially set forth in the definition of the prior term, comparative negligence.  Glad someone is paying attention, because apprently, I'm not;)  The full definition of contributory negligence is:

n. a doctrine of common law that if a person was injured in part due to his/her own negligence (his/her negligence "contributed" to the accident), the injured party would not be entitled to collect any damages (money) from another party who supposedly caused the accident. Under this rule, a badly injured person who was only slightly negligent could not win in court against a very negligent defendant. If Joe Tosspot was driving drunk and speeding and Angela Comfort was going 25 m.p.h. but six inches over the center-line, most likely Angela would be precluded from any recovery (receiving any money for injuries or damages) from a car crash. The possible unfair results have led some juries to ignore the rule and, in the past few decades, most states have adopted a comparative negligence test in which the relative percentages of negligence by each person are used to determine damage recovery (how much money would be paid to the injured person). See also: comparative negligence negligence.

Today's term is:

true bill.

As always, no dictionaries, please.


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


A criminal indictment. I have no idea where that comes from though. Maybe its broader and includes other public ratifications of governmental action?

The comments to this entry are closed.