Defenses and Affirmative Defenses
Liability Defenses
Comparative negligence allocates fault among the parties and reduces the plaintiff's damages by their percentage. Pure comparative systems permit recovery regardless of the plaintiff's share, while modified systems bar recovery once the plaintiff's fault reaches fifty or fifty-one percent.
A small number of states retain contributory negligence, under which any plaintiff fault bars recovery entirely.
Alternative Names:
Comparative Fault, Contributory Fault
Why it Matters?
In modified comparative states, the threshold creates a cliff: moving the plaintiff's share from forty-nine to fifty-one percent changes the outcome from a reduced recovery to nothing. That makes fault allocation the central trial issue in many cases, and it is why defense presentations focus on the plaintiff's conduct even where the defendant's negligence is difficult to contest.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between pure and modified comparative fault?
Which states still use contributory negligence?
