About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

7 Pac. L. J. 770 (1976)
Comparative Negligence in California: Multiple Party Litigation

handle is hein.journals/mcglr7 and id is 788 raw text is: Comparative Negligence In California: Multiple Party Litigation In 1975, the California Supreme Court in Li v. Yellow Cab Co.1 unilaterally adopted a system of pure comparative negligence.2 In so doing, the court judicially abolished the doctrines of contributory negli- gence,3 unreasonable!' assumption of the risk,4 and last clear chance,5 1. 13 Cal. 3d 804, 532 P.2d 1226, 119 Cal. Rptr. 858 (1975). 2. The unilateral adoption of comparative negligence by the California Supreme Court is interesting in view of prior unsuccessful attempts to amend California Civil Code Section 1714 so as to provide for comparative negligence. These attempts include A.B. 500 (Proposed Addition to Civil Code Section 6660), 586, 731, 1975-76 Regular Session, which would have provided for a system of comparative negligence in which a plaintiff must have been less than 50 percent responsible for the accident [hereinafter referred to as a 50 percent system]; S.B. 494, 1975-76 Regular Session, which would have provided for special verdicts and comparative negligence; S.B. 10 (Proposed Addition to Civil Code Section 6660), 557, 2021, 2350, 2425, 1973-74 Regular Session, which proposed a similar 50 percent system; A.B. 50 (Proposed Addition to Civil Code Section 6660), 1666, 1973-74 Regular Session, which sought to create a 50 percent system of comparative negligence; A.B. 102, 125 (Proposed Addition to Civil Code Section 6660) and S.B. 40 (Proposed Addition to Civil Code Section 6660), 132, 384, 1493 (Proposed Addition to Civil Code Section 6660) 1972 Regular Session, which were introduced to modify California Civil Code Section 1714; A.B. 694 and S.B. 43, 1971 Regular Session, which would have provided for a 50 percent system; A.B. 2895, 1961 Regular Session, which would have provided for a system of pure comparative negli- gence; S.B. 845, 1957 Regular Session, which would have provided for mandatory special verdicts and a system of pure comparative negligence; A.B. 1845 and S.B. 1063, 1955 Regular Session, which proposed pure comparative negligence; A.B. 406, 779 and S.B. 1492, 1953 Regular Session, which were introduced to provide a system of pure comparative negligence; A.B. 1310, 1951 Regular Session, which attempted to enact a 50 percent system of negligence; and A.B. 909, 1941 Regular Session, which also proposed a 50 percent system of comparative negligence. One possible conclusion from the prior proposed legislation is that the legislature was uncertain as to the potential scope of California Civil Code Section 1714. Another possible interpretation is that the legislature did not want to modify the common law defense of contributory negligence. 3. 13 Cal. 3d at 828-29, 532 P.2d at 1243, 119 Cal. Rptr. at 875. Contributory negligence is conduct on the part of the plaintiff which falls below the standard to which he should conform for his own protection, and which is a legally contributing cause co- operating with the negligence of the defendant in bringing about the plaintiff's harm. R EATEMENT (SEcoND) OF TORTS §463 (1965); 13 Cal. 3d at 809, 532 P.2d at 1230, 119 Cal. Rptr. at 862. A pure comparative negligence system diminishes the damages awarded a plaintiff in proportion to his fault. Thus, if in P's suit against D, P is found to have suffered $10,000 in damages and is found to have been 20 percent at fault, P wil recover $8000. 4. 13 Cal. 3d at 829, 532 P.2d at 1243, 119 Cal. Rptr. at 875. The Li court repudiated that portion of the defense of assumption of the risk, similar to contributory negligence, where a plaintiff unreasonably assumes a particular known risk. Id. at 824- 25, 532 P.2d at 1240-41, 119 Cal. Rptr. at 872-73. 5. Id. at 829, 532 P.2d at 1243, 119 Cal. Rptr. at 875. The last clear chance doctrine describes those situations in which a defendant had the last clear opportunity to

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most