Assumption of Risk and Abnormally Dangerous Activities: A Proposal
![handle is hein.journals/montlr51 and id is 167 raw text is: ASSUMPTION OF RISK AND ABNORMALLY
DANGEROUS ACTIVITIES: A PROPOSAL
David K. DeWolf* and Deborah G. Hander**
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ..................................... 161
II. Assumption of Risk and Contributory Negligence ... 163
A. Contributory Negligence and Last Clear Chance 163
B. Assumption of Risk ......................... 164
III. Assumption of Risk and the Adoption of Comparative
F a u lt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9
IV. Proposal: The Concept of Fault Should Include
(Even Reasonable) Assumption of Risk ............ 171
A. Assumption of Risk and the Calabresian Theory
of Entitlem ents ............................. 174
B. The Practical Arguments .................... 177
1. Retaining the Bar: Express and Implied As-
sum ption of Risk ........................ 178
2. Abolishing Assumption of Risk: Merging
It with Contributory Negligence ........... 183
3. A Solution: The Percentage Approach ..... 185
V. Application of the Proposed Assumption of Risk Prin-
c ip le . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6
V I. C onclusion ...................................... 189
I. INTRODUCTION
Despite the widespread adoption of otherwise comprehensive
comparative fault schemes,' the status of assumption of risk has
remained insecure.2 Courts have had difficulty deciding
whether-and how-assumption of risk should apply, as illustrated
* Assistant Professor, Gonzaga Law School; Stanford Univ., B.A., 1971; Yale Law
School, J.D. 1979.
** Candidate for J.D., Gonzaga Law School; Wellesley College, B.A., 1974; N.Y.U.,
M.B.A. 1977. The authors would like to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of several
readers and critics of previous drafts, including Robert Natelson, Carl Tobias, and Steven
Smith.
1. V. SCHWARTZ, COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE, §§ 1.4, 1.5 app. A (2d ed. 1986) (state stat-
utes and judicial rulings regarding the adoption of comparative systems); UNIFORM COMPAR-
ATIVE FAULT ACT, 12 U.L.A. 41 (Supp. 1989) [hereinafter UCFA].
2. As discussed more fully below, many jurisdictions have purported to abolish as-
sumption of risk or merge it with other doctrines, but only for some purposes. See infra
notes 106-12 and accompanying text.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/montlr51&div=10&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Assumption of Risk and Abnormally Dangerous Activities: A Proposal
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most