Pure Comparative Negligence Scenario

Pure Comparative Negligence Scenario

Compensation is reduced by percentage of fault. There is no cutoff.

Select Start to explore.

START

How to Think About This Scenario

In a pure comparative negligence system:• Both parties can share fault • Fault is assigned as a percentage • Recovery is reduced by that percentage You are not acting as a judge. Think like a case reviewer: • Who violated traffic laws? • Whose action created greater risk?• How might responsibility reasonably be divided?

NEXT

A car accident occurs at an intersection. Driver A runs a red light. Driver B is speeding. Both are injured and file claims for damages. Based on what you learned, how should fault be divided?

DECIDE FAULT

Based on the facts and the rules of pure comparative negligence, which fault division is most reasonable?

SEE WHY

Why This Division Is Most Reasonable

Click each driver to see how responsibility is evaluated.

• Ran a red light (major traffic violation)
• Created the primary danger at the intersection
• Assigned 80% fault
• The Why- Running a red light directly violates traffic laws, Driver A carries the greater share of responsibility.

• Was speeding (contributed to the collision)
• Had the right-of-way
• Assigned 20% fault
• The Why- Speeding contributed to the harm, but did not outweigh Driver A’s violation.

Driver A

Driver B

KEY TAKEAWAY

KEY TAKEAWAY

When reviewing a case in a pure comparative negligence system:• Focus on how fault is shared, not who is right or wrong.• Each party’s actions matter.• Recovery depends on how responsibility is divided.

Click Complete Course to mark this section as finished. Then scroll down in the lesson and select Continue to move on to the next negligence type.

Complete Course