This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. Thank you.
As with intentional tort, negligence doctrine allows for some defenses. These often focus on the behavior of the plaintiff-victim rather than defendant-wrongdoer. In its more traditional form, to validate a defense was to extinguish all liability: defenses of merit would be complete ones.
Contributory negligence folds in all the elements of a negligence case against the plaintiff, with the plaintiff as his or her own victim. Traditionally, any amount of negligence by the plaintiff extinguished a case against the defendant. The harshness of that rule led to some countervailing exceptions to flip the “all” of the defense back to “nothing” — exceptions like the last clear chance doctrine, by which the plaintiff’s negligence wouldn’t count against the case if the plaintiff’s poor behavior had made the plaintiff helpless, and then the defendant, seeing that, acted negligently anyway.
Starting in the 1960’s and 70’s, American tort law started to split the difference between all or nothing. The concept of comparative negligence was introduced, and through it juries might be asked to compare the defendant’s negligence against the plaintiff’s, deducting the plaintiff’s share from any recovery. How to make such comparisons is far from clear, especially in cases with multiple defendants, each playing very different roles.EDIT PLAYLIST INFORMATION DELETE PLAYLIST
Edit playlist item notes below to have a mix of public & private notes, or:MAKE ALL NOTES PUBLIC (5/5 playlist item notes are public) MAKE ALL NOTES PRIVATE (0/5 playlist item notes are private)
|1||Show/Hide More||Davies v. Mann--"The Last Clear Chance and the Donkey"|
|2||Show/Hide More||Derheim v. N. Fiorito, Inc.--"The Non-Seat-Belt Wearing Plaintiff"|
|3||Show/Hide More||Fritts v. McKinne--"The Doctor who Cried Drunk Driver"|
|4||Show/Hide More||Veazey v. Elmwood Plantation Associates, Inc.--"The Totally-At-Fault Apartment Complex Manager"|
|5||Show/Hide More||Washington Metro. Area Transit Authority v. Johnson--"The Suicide in the Subway Station"|
July 24, 2017
Harvard Law School, Berkman Center
This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. If you would like access to the new version of the H2O platform and have not already been contacted by a member of our team, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org. Thank you.