Comparative versus Contributory Negligence

At one point, defendants in personal injury claims could argue “contributory negligence,” which nullified their liability if they could be prove that the plaintiff was in the least bit responsible for their own injury. Because of the vast injustices that this defense option created, most US jurisdictions have replaced contributive negligence with comparative negligence, which holds each party accountable for the portion of the accident that they were responsible for.

If you have been injured and you believe that another party’s negligence is fully or partially responsible, you may be eligible to receive compensation. Contact a Harrisburg personal injury attorney at the law office of Lowenthal & Abrams, P.C. to discuss the details of your case. Call 610-667-7511 today to schedule a free initial consultation.

Contributory Negligence

When contributory negligence was a viable defense, defendants could escape liability by arguing that if the plaintiff was even partially responsible for the accident, then they should not have to pay any compensation for damages. This defense allowed defendants to escape liability when people were injured by their negligence, even if the cause of the accident was primarily the defendants’ fault.

Comparative Negligence

The new defense option, comparative negligence, enables plaintiffs to file for compensation, so long as they were not responsible for more than 50% of their own accident. Under this defense, defendants are held accountable for the amount of damage that their negligence caused. For example, a workplace injury caused by defective machinery and an operator error may be divided into 75% manufacturer negligence and 25% employee negligence, and the liability will be proportionate.

Contact Us

If you or someone you know has been injured because of another party’s negligence, contact the Harrisburg personal injury lawyers of Lowenthal & Abrams, P.C., at 610-667-7511 to determine your legal options.