Author Archives: Robert Ross
“Secondary Assumption of Risk” in Comparative Negligence
WHAT IS SECONDARY ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK? “Secondary assumption of the risk” is a legal doctrine which applies when a defendant’s actions violate a duty of care to the injured plaintiff, but the plaintiff knowingly proceeds with an activity despite an awareness of the inherent (or increased) risk. In California, secondary assumption of the risk… Read More »
Can Injured Players, or Spectators, Sue for Injuries at Sporting Events?
INJURIES TO ATHLETES OFTEN FALL WITHIN “ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK” Many sporting and sports-related activities are “inherently dangerous” under the law, and injuries resulting from participation in these activities–even by minors–may fall under “assumption of the risk.” Although coaches and other teachers or sporting instructors generally take reasonable steps (where possible) to minimize the risks… Read More »
Sometimes, Comparative Negligence Includes “Assumption of the Risk”
ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK MAY BAR AN INJURED PLAINTIFF’S RECOVERY As we discussed earlier in the month, the legal doctrine known as “assumption of the risk” states that a plaintiff’s right to recover damages from an otherwise negligent defendant may be reduced–or barred altogether–if the plaintiff “knowingly and voluntarily” accepted the risks associated with the… Read More »
More Facts About Comparative Negligence
Earlier this week, we defined comparative negligence and explained, in general terms, that comparative negligence can reduce a plaintiff’s recoverable damages by an amount proportionate to the plaintiff’s negligent “fault” in the incident that caused the injury or damage. Today, we’re taking a look at some more specific rules which govern comparative negligence in California. COMPARATIVE… Read More »
Comparative Negligence: When the Victim is Also “Responsible”
THE EXCEPTION: DRUNK DRIVING A few California courts have made an exception to this general rule of comparative negligence and percentage fault where injured plaintiffs knowingly opted to operate motor vehicles while intoxicated. In other words: plaintiffs who drive drunk may find themselves entirely unable to recover for injuries occurring while DUI. In the cases… Read More »
Landowner Liability for Workers’ Injuries (Part 2)
IN SOME CASES, LAND OWNERS MAY BE LIABLE FOR INJURIES TO CONTRACTORS’ EMPLOYEES Although the “general rule” provides for a lack of landowner liability following an injury to a contractor’s employee, the many exceptions make this particular rule far less effective than many others which protect the owners of land. As we discussed earlier… Read More »
Are Property Owners Liable for Contractors’ Injuries? (Part 1)
Contractors and other workers sometimes incur injuries in the course of their employment. When those injuries occur on private property, questions may arise about whether or not the owner of the land on which the injury occurred is liable (in negligence or otherwise) for damages to the injured party. In the coming days, we’ll… Read More »
The Plaintiff’s Liability for Engaging in Dangerous Behaviors
WHAT IS “ASSUMPTION OF THE RISK”? The legal doctrine known as “assumption of the risk” states that a plaintiff’s right to recover damages from an otherwise negligent defendant may be reduced–or barred altogether–if the plaintiff “knowingly and voluntarily” accepted the risks associated with the (usually dangerous) activities that resulted in the plaintiff’s injuries. In… Read More »
The Duty to Avoid “Obvious” Hazards
Landlords, and tenants in control of property, do not have a legal obligation to ensure that no one is injured on or by conditions on their properties. The law does not consider them “insurers” of people’s safety. The “duty” which exists under negligence law requires landlords, and other people in possession and control of property,… Read More »
Are Homeowners Liable for Dangerous Sidewalks?
GENERALLY, PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE NO DUTY TO MAINTAIN OR REPAIR PUBLIC SIDEWALKS California law generally does not hold property owners liable for the failure to repair, maintain, or clean public sidewalks adjacent to their homes or business properties. This liability may be created by statute, but in the absence of a specific law requiring… Read More »
