Bike Accident Injury Verdict $39 Million
$39 million. That’s a lot of money. But it doesn’t replace the father and husband that was lost.
From a legal standpoint, this presents an interesting question. If you read the article you’ll note that this award is based on the defendant’s 69% fault. This means that the state where this verdict was rendered is a comparative negligence state, as opposed to a contributory negligence state (like NC). That means that the jury found that while the plaintiff was 31% at fault, the defendant was 69% at fault, and they awarded that percentage of the damages to the family. In NC, the family would have gotten $0 even if the jury only found the victim 1% at fault.
While a tragedy for the family, this is a great example of the inequity of contributory negligence and shows why we should join the overwhelming majority of states in our union and adopt comparative negligence. Of course, we arguably have bigger fish to fry these days, like getting our legislature to treat all humans equally and avoid being the laughing stock of America. But maybe one day we’ll get there.
Trackback from your site.