How A Comparative Negligence Ruling Could Affect A Slip And Fall Case

A court grants a comparative negligence ruling after a jury has made a comparison, and the jurors have based their decision on that comparison. If a defendant has raised the issues that seem to favor a comparative negligence ruling, the jury compares the property owner’s negligence with the plaintiff’s negligence. The jury must look for examples of two different forms of negligence.

What are those examples, and who must demonstrate an action that could serve as such an example?

Someone that does something unsafe would demonstrate a neglectful and careless action. By the same token, someone that has failed to act in manner that serves as a display of common sense could be called negligent. The jury has to study the actions of the plaintiff (the injured victim) and decide if any of those actions could be used as grounds for declaring the same plaintiff to be at least partially responsible for the harm-causing fall.

When can a defendant raise the issue of comparative negligence?

A defendant gets to raise that issue after he or she has been declared negligent. In a slip and fall case, that ruling would hold the defendant responsible for injuries sustained by the victim. If, in the defendant’s mind, he or she does not deserve to be held wholly responsible, then the issue of comparative negligence can be introduced, by the Personal Injury Lawyer in Kingston

A defendant cannot raise the issue of comparative negligence after having won a slip and fall case. At that point, legal authorities view that case as closed. The legal system does not allow for the re-opening of such a case, in order to get a ruling on the extent to which the plaintiff had been negligent.

This rule shows the degree to which the legal system focuses on helping the plaintiff become whole again. If a plaintiff has failed to win a slip and fall case, the legal system refuses to consider a request for a consideration of a comparative negligence ruling. Legal authorities can see that such a request does seem to suggest a desire to revenge the action taken by the plaintiff.

What happens if a jury finds that the defendant in a slip and fall incident was not wholly responsible for the situation that cased the plaintiff to fall?

At that point the jury must decide what percent of negligence should be tied to the actions displayed by the two opposing parties. The jury’s decision will determine how much money should be taken from the earlier verdict, the one that was in favor of the plaintiff. For example, if the jury found that out of all the negligent actions, the plaintiff had performed 20% and the defendant 80%, the plaintiff would get only 80% of what had been awarded in the earlier verdict.