What is the difference between contributory negligence and comparative negligence?

Contributory negligence and comparative negligence are two legal doctrines used in Washington when determining fault in medical malpractice cases. Contributory negligence states that an individual who is found to have contributed in some way to the cause of their injuries can be completely barred from any recovery of damages. This means that if even the slightest fault can be attributed to the injured party, they cannot access any compensation for their losses. Comparative negligence, on the other hand, allows an injured party to still receive a portion of the compensation, even if they were partially at fault. This doctrine places blame on all those involved and apportions recovery based on the degree of fault. For example, if the injured person is found to be 40% at fault, then they can still recover up to 60% of the compensation award. In Washington, comparative negligence is used to determine fault in medical malpractice cases, rather than contributory negligence. This allows patients to still receive compensation for their losses and medical expenses, even if they may have done something wrong.

Related FAQs

What is the difference between contributory negligence and comparative negligence?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts