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
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