Quote:
Originally Posted by KSigkid
As to your first point in the above post, a number of states have a mechanism in place for this in comparative negligence; in that way, either the plaintiff's recovery is reduced by his/her "fault" in the incident, or, in some states, if the plaintiff is found to be more than 50% liable by the judge or jury, the plaintiff will walk away with nothing.
|
I was under the impression that comparative/contributory negligence is only available as a defense to negligence torts (which defamation/libel/intentional infliction of emotional distress are not) so in this case would only be available as a defense if they were asserting a claim of negligence against McDonalds.
__________________
"I put my mama on her, she threw her in the air. My mama said son, that's a mother buckin' mare."
|
Linear Mode
