Opinion ID: 1726172
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Appropriate Form of Comparative Negligence

Text: Extensive discussion in the WILLIAMS opinion in Kirby was devoted to an analysis of the most appropriate form of comparative negligence to adopt. Kirby, 629-645. Since that time, we have not altered our view that the doctrine of pure comparative negligence most nearly accomplishes the goal of a fair system of apportionment of damages. Only pure comparative negligence truly distributes responsibility according to fault of the respective parties. Schwartz, Comparative Negligence (Indianapolis: Allen Smith Co, 1974), § 21.3, p 347. As stated in Kirby, We are convinced, as was the United States Supreme Court and the other courts which have adopted the comparative negligence doctrine, that the `pure' form is preferable to any other. The `pure' form does not `unjustly enrich' anyone. For example, if an accident is wholly the fault of one party, then that party would not, of course, recover damages. If an injured plaintiff was 51% to blame, there still remains 49% of the fault which was not plaintiff's, and for which therefore the person who caused that much of the injury should be liable. The rule preventing recovery if plaintiff's negligence exceeds 50% of the total fault is just as arbitrary as that which completely denies recovery. Is the person who is 49% negligent that much more deserving than the one who is 51% negligent? We acknowledge that even under the `pure' form of comparative negligence there will be appeals concerning the percentage of award, but it is undoubtedly more compelling to appeal when you have been awarded nothing than when you have received some compensation. However, just as we did not reach our decision on contributory negligence because of the anticipated number of case filings, we will not reach our decision on the form of comparative negligence because of an equally unpredictable element, the anticipated number of appeals. Commentators acknowledge that the hybrid 50% rule leads to strange results.