What are the common defenses used in a boating accident case?

One of the most common defenses used in a boating accident case in Virginia is called the “comparative fault” defense. This defense states that both parties may have been partially responsible for the accident. This could mean that both parties may be partially liable for the damages suffered. For example, one party may have been driving too fast or recklessly, while the other party may have been distracted or not paying attention. This can help lessen the amount of damages that one party is responsible for. Another common defense used in boating accident cases is known as the “assumption of risk” defense. This defense is commonly used when one party was aware of the risks involved in a certain activity, but still decided to engage in that activity. For example, if a person was aware of the potential risks involved in operating a motorboat, but still decided to take the risk and operate it, the defendant may use the assumption of risk defense to reduce the amount of damages they are liable for. A third common defense used in boating accident cases is known as the “negligence per se” defense. This defense is used when a person is accused of violating a federal, state, or local law, and the violation resulted in an accident. So, for example, if one party was operating a motorboat and was in violation of a local ordinance, the defendant may use the negligence per se defense to try and reduce their damages. Finally, there is also the “contributory negligence” defense which is commonly used in boating accident cases. This defense states that if both parties were negligent and contributed to the accident, then neither party should be held liable for the damages. This can help reduce the amount of damages that one party is responsible for.

What are the common defenses used in a boating accident case?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts