Defenses To Negligence Essay

DEFENSES TO NEGLIGENCE

The law recognizes various defenses to negligence. These defenses include: assumption of risk, contributory and comparative negligence, rescue doc-trine, last clear chance, and the Fireman’s Rule.

Assumption of Risk

The defense of assumption of risk applies to situations in which the injured party knew of the danger or peril, understood the risks, and freely and vol-untarily chose to act. Assumption of risk serves to limit the liability of a per-son who negligently creates a hazard. For example, a novice skier who chooses to ski down a trail that is clearly marked “Warning: Steep Trail— Experts Only” assumes the risk that he or she may be injured in a fall be-cause the ski trail is so steep and/or difficult. In many

The rescue doctrine derives its basis on the recognition that danger invites rescue. A rescuer who comes to the aid of another is not prohibited by contributory negligence or assumption of risk from suing for negligence. Contributory and Comparitive Negligence

Often a person’s injuries or property damage are caused primarily by the de-fendant’s conduct, but are also caused in some small part by his or her own conduct. The law was traditionally rather harsh in this regard. At common law, when the plaintiff was shown to be in any way contributory negligent in the causing his or her own injury, the defendant could not be held liable. This contributory negligence rule was an absolute defense to negligence cases. Over the years, all states have abolished the contributory negligence rule in favor of a system called comparative