Court Opinion

ID: 9559213
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:24:40.455233+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:07.301441
License: Public Domain

RABINOWITZ, Justice
(concurring).
I generally agree with the court’s treatment of the issues which arise in the situation where a plaintiff who is himself negligent asserts a claim founded upon strict liability. Perhaps it is only a semantic difference rather than reflective of a true functional distinction but I prefer adoption of a comparative causation analysis in strict liability cases. Thus, I would require the trier of fact to compare the harm caused by the product’s defect with the harm caused by the claimant’s own negligence. See Solet v. M/V Capt. H.V. Dufrene, 303 F.Supp. 980, 986 (E.D.La.1969). Adoption of a comparative causation approach would avoid the theoretical problems inherent in any attempt to compare relative degrees of fault where the defendant’s negligence, or fault, is determined by principles of strict liability.