Virginia’s Comparative Negligence Rule

Introduction

In Virginia, the law of comparative negligence governs the way damages are assessed in civil court cases where negligence is an issue. Comparative negligence is a legal principle used in personal injury and auto accident litigation that compares each party’s fault in causing an injury. In Virginia, an injured party’s fault is compared to the overall fault of all the parties involved and the damages awarded accordingly. This article explains Virginia’s comparative negligence rule and its implications for those filing a personal injury or auto accident lawsuit in Virginia.

The Basics of the Legal Principle of Comparative Negligence

Comparative negligence is a legal principle which provides that damages awarded in personal injury and auto accident cases will be reduced by the amount that a plaintiff contributed to their own injury. The principle is codified in Virginia Code 8.01-737. In other words, when a plaintiff is found to have contributed to their own injury, a court will reduce the damages that the plaintiff is entitled to receive.

For example, in an auto accident case involving two drivers, Driver A and Driver B, a court may find that Driver A was partially negligent in causing the accident. In other words, the court may find that Driver A was partly responsible for their own injuries. Under the comparative negligence principle, damages awarded to Driver A will be reduced by the amount that they contributed to their own injury.

Factors Considered When Applying the Rule

When determining how much of a plaintiff’s damages should be reduced under the doctrine of comparative negligence, a few factors must be considered. First, the extent to which the plaintiff was negligent must be evaluated. It is not enough that the plaintiff was negligent; the court must determine how much the plaintiff contributed to their own injury.

Second, the court must consider whether the other party was also negligent. Even if a plaintiff was more negligent than the other party, the court must still consider the extent of the other party’s negligence and their contributory fault.

Finally, the court must consider the “proportionate responsibility” of the parties for the plaintiff’s injury. The court must determine the extent to which each party is responsible for the plaintiff’s injury, taking into account the other factors discussed above.

Implications of Virginia’s Comparative Negligence Rule

The Virginia comparative negligence rule has implications for both plaintiffs and defendants in personal injury and auto accident cases. For Plaintiff’s, the rule means that they may not be able to recover the full amount of damages they are seeking. If a court finds that the plaintiff was partially negligent in causing their injury, they may be required to accept a reduction in damages.

For defendants, the rule presents an opportunity to mitigate the damages they are liable to pay. By setting forth evidence of the plaintiff’s contributory negligence, defendants may be able to reduce their liability by convincing the court that the plaintiff was at fault.

Conclusion

Virginia’s comparative negligence rule is an important legal principle that governs the way damages are assessed in personal injury and auto accident cases. Under the rule, the damages awarded to the plaintiff may be reduced by the amount that the plaintiff contributed to their own injury. In other words, when a plaintiff is found to have contributed to their own injury, a court will reduce the damages awarded. The rule has implications for both plaintiffs and defendants and can be used to mitigate liability in civil court controversies.