by Suzanne Mathews

Created on: September 29, 2010

During legal proceedings, we may hear the words comparative or contributory negligence frequently, particularly in civil suits involving an injury and/or injuries. Yet, we may wonder how these terms compare to one another, if any. There is a difference between comparative and contributory; however, the term negligence, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, is “a person’s failure to exercise the standard of care that a reasonable prudent person would have exercised in a similar situation” (Gardner B. A., 2004, p. 1061). For example, if  driver ( A) ran a stop sign and crashed into driver (B’s) car, it would be safe to predict that driver (A) is negligent of failure exercise a standard of care because he failed to stop at the sign as a reasonable prudent person would have done.

The word contributory is best described as a person’s own actions more specifically, the plaintiff’s role in causing his or her injury. Using the example above, when driver (A) ran the stop sign, he sustained an injury to his arm; however, one might preclude driver (A) own actions, failing stop at the sign, caused his injury.  Comparative is as the word suggests, which is to compare a situation or a person’s behavior. Used in legal terms as comparative negligence it is “a plaintiff’s own negligence that proportionally reduces the possible damages recoverable from a defendant” (Gardner B. A., 2004, p. 1062) and in some jurisdictions prevents the plaintiff from recovering damages.  

Putting a spin on the initial example, during a heavy rainstorm and dense fog driver (A) was driving over the posted speed limit, unable to see well in the pouring rain, driver (A) rear-ended driver (B) causing injury to both drivers. Driver (B) sues driver (A); however, driver (B) did not have his lights on. In the example, it is safe to surmise, because driver (A) was speeding in the heavy rainstorm was not using the standard of care, as a reasonable person would do in a similar situation. Yet, driver (B) did not have his lights on which have made it impossible for driver (A) to see the vehicle in front. In a situation such as this, where each driver failed to “perform a standard or care”, a jury would first review who contributed to the injuries. Second, they   would compare what percentage each party was responsible. Suppose the jury determined that Driver (A) was 60% at fault for driving too fast in bad weather and driver (B) is 40% at fault driving without lights.  Thus, the damages awarded to driver (B) would be reduced by 40%. In some states if a driver is found to 50% responsible they would not recover any damages.  

To summarize, comparative negligence is to compare the percentage of two or more parties actions or negligence the percentage is used to determine the possible damages to be awarded; whereas, contributory negligence is defined as “a plaintiff’s role” in causing his or her injury.  Of course, this is a simple example of the differences between contributory and comparative negligence, and it should not be used as legal advice. In legal situations involving contributory and/or comparative negligence, or any other legal matter, one must always consult an attorney.  

Reference:

Garner. B.A. (2004). Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed.) St. Paul: West Publishing Co.

Learn more about this author, Suzanne Mathews.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.