Friday, October 10, 2014

Coney v. J.L.G. Industries, Inc. case brief summary

Coney v. J.L.G. Industries, Inc. case brief summary

F: Jasper died while operating work platform, manufactured by D, and this action is based on strict PL. D argued that Jasper had committed contributory negligence and his boss also had contributed to P’s injuries

R: 1. Doctrine of comparative negligence is applicable to strict PLI action
2. Comparative negligence does not eliminate joint and several liability

3. Retention of joint and several liability does not deny D equal protection of the laws. Co:

Two different Jurisdictions
1. Contributory Negligence (old)

- If P is neg, then no recovery
2. Comparative Negligence (new, almost most states) - Reduce by percentage of Ds
- same principle of P-D apply to D-D.

WRF joint several liability, remember some states, when they adopt comparative neg. in favor of comparative among the Ds. 1. Comparative neg + but doesn’t extent do multiple tortfeasors of D 􏲼 joint and several
2. Comparative neg + but extends to multiple tortfeasors -> not joint and several

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide

Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...