Asked by Roberta McGuire on Jul 03, 2024
Verified
Amtul and Hassan were involved in an automobile accident.Amtul's car,worth $10,000,was destroyed.Hassan suffered no personal injuries or property damage.The case went to court and a jury determined that Amtul was 30 percent at fault and Hassan was 70 percent at fault.Under what legal theory would Amtul be able to recover $7,000 from Hassan?
A) Contributory negligence
B) Comparative negligence
C) Negligence per se
D) Res ipsa loquitur
Comparative Negligence
Comparative negligence is a legal doctrine that reduces the claimant's compensation by a percentage equal to their fault in causing the damage or injury.
Contributory Negligence
Contributory Negligence is a legal doctrine that may limit or prevent a plaintiff's recovery if it can be shown that their own negligence contributed to the harm suffered.
Negligence Per Se
The legal doctrine where an act is considered negligent because it violates a statute or regulation.
- Absorb the understandings of contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and assumption of risk, and their significance in influencing liability and damages.
Verified Answer
DG
DEEPTHI GALAGALIJul 07, 2024
Final Answer :
B
Explanation :
According to the comparative negligence formula,a plaintiff's recovery is equal to the defendant's percentage share of the negligence causing the injury multiplied by the plaintiff's proven damages.
Learning Objectives
- Absorb the understandings of contributory negligence, comparative negligence, and assumption of risk, and their significance in influencing liability and damages.