Texas’s Comparative Negligence Rule
Texas is among the states that employ the comparative negligence rule for determining personal injury compensation. The comparative negligence rule can be applied when both parties in a dispute are partially responsible for the damages that have been suffered. The primary idea behind the rule is that an injured person can claim damages even if they are partially at fault, as long as their level of fault is lower than the defendant’s. In Texas, the comparative negligence rule is governed by a specific set of laws.
In the state of Texas, the comparative negligence rule applies to any civil action where the defendant is found liable for damages that were partially caused by the plaintiff’s negligence. According to this rule, the damages that the plaintiff is eligible to receive are reduced in proportion to the amount of fault attributed to the plaintiff. For instance, if the plaintiff is found to be 50 percent at fault, the defendant will only be liable for 50 percent of the damages.
In Texas, the comparative negligence rule can be applied both in contributory and comparative negligence cases. In contributory negligence cases, if the plaintiff is found to be partially at fault in any way for the damages that have been suffered, then the plaintiff is not eligible for any compensation. On the other hand, in comparative negligence cases, the damages suffered by the plaintiff are still diminished in proportion to the plaintiff’s level of fault, but the plaintiff is still eligible for compensation even if their degree of negligence is higher than 50 percent.
The rule of contributed negligence is typically applied in medical malpractice cases. Under this rule, if the plaintiff’s doctor acted properly, but the plaintiff’s own behavior contributed to the injury, then the plaintiff is not eligible to recover any damages. For example, if a patient refuses to follow the doctor’s prescribed treatment plan and is injured as a result, then the doctor is not liable for any damages.
Under the comparative negligence rule, the types of damages an injured person can receive are divided into three categories: non-economic damages, economic damages, and punitive damages. Non-economic damages are paid to compensate the injured person for the pain and suffering they endured as a result of their injury. Economic damages refer to the medical costs, lost wages, and property damage caused by the injury. Punitive damages are paid if the actions of the defendant were especially outrageous or egregious.
As with any legal rule, there are certain exceptions to the comparative negligence rule in Texas. For example, the court may find that the degree of fault attributed to the plaintiff is so great that the defendant has no legal obligation to pay any damages at all. Additionally, the court may find that the plaintiff’s behavior was so negligent that it should be considered a complete bar to recovery. Lastly, the court may find that the defendant’s actions were so outrageous or egregious that the plaintiff should not be penalized for any percentage of fault.
In summary, the comparative negligence rule is a legal concept that applies in Texas and a variety of other states. It allows an injured person to seek compensation even if they are partially responsible for the injuries that were inflicted. If the court finds that the defendant is more at fault than the plaintiff, the plaintiff can seek damages, but they will be diminished in proportion to the degree of their fault. Understanding the basics of the comparative negligence rule is essential for any person considering a personal injury case in Texas.
