M7: Introduction to Negligence Defenses
Overview of Negligence Litigation and the Role of Defenses
Successfully proving the prima facie case for negligence does not automatically guarantee a victory for the plaintiff.
A plaintiff may successfully establish all five standard elements of a negligence claim:
Duty
Breach (the defendant breached the duty of care)
Actual Causation
Proximate Causation
Harm (the plaintiff suffered actual damages)
Even when these elements are proven, tort law provides several defenses that can lead to two specific outcomes:
Defeating the plaintiff's case in its entirety (absolute bar to recovery).
Reducing the amount of monetary recovery the plaintiff is seeking.
The Concept of Affirmative Defenses
Tort law utilizes what are known as "affirmative defenses."
In an affirmative defense, the defendant essentially concedes the basic facts of the negligence claim but offers a legal justification that overrides liability.
The defendant's position in an affirmative defense can be summarized as follows: "Yes, I breached the duty of care that caused the plaintiff's harm. Nevertheless, I still win because of some reason."
Traditional Affirmative Defenses: Contributory Negligence
Contributory negligence is one of the two traditional affirmative defenses used to address a plaintiff's role in their own injury.
Definition: Contributory negligence refers specifically to the plaintiff's own "unreasonable conduct."
Scope: This conduct must contribute directly to the accident at issue in the legal case.
Reasoning: If a plaintiff's own lack of care played a part in the harm they suffered, this defense may mitigate or eliminate the defendant's liability.
Traditional Affirmative Defenses: Assumption of the Risk
Assumption of the risk is the second primary traditional affirmative defense to negligence claims.
Definition: This defense refers to the plaintiff's "knowing choice" regarding a particular risk.
Materialization: The defense is applicable when the specific risk that the plaintiff knowingly chose to take eventually materializes and leads to the plaintiff's harm.
Criteria: Unlike contributory negligence, which focuses on the unreasonableness of the action, assumption of the risk focuses on the plaintiff's subjective knowledge and voluntary decision to encounter a known danger.